or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Bush Cheney wanted to invade Iraq before 9/11
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Bush Cheney wanted to invade Iraq before 9/11

post #1 of 114
Thread Starter 
I mean how many of us don't know this by now.... This admin. wanted to risk American lives and those of innocent Iraqis before 9/11 ever happened.

Don't you know it is "American" to invade other countries and kill people? At least according to NEOCON artists Bush and Cheney.

Here is the latest in this long nightmare for the world.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18348452/

My question is how can the 28% of you who still lick the boots of Bush and Co. still defend these people who like to make their business partners wealthy with American tax payer money and military and civillian lives?

Is there no shame? No sense of right or wrong?

Fellowship
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #2 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

I mean how many of us don't know this by now.... This admin. wanted to risk American lives and those of innocent Iraqis before 9/11 ever happened.

Don't you know it is "American" to invade other countries and kill people? At least according to NEOCON artists Bush and Cheney.

Here is the latest in this long nightmare for the world.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18348452/

My question is how can the 28% of you who still lick the boots of Bush and Co. still defend these people who like to make their business partners wealthy with American tax payer money and military and civillian lives?

Is there no shame? No sense of right or wrong?

Fellowship

I was waiting for this. And of course, Tenet's credibility and motives cannot be called into question. Anyone who does so is part of the sheeple.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #3 of 114
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I was waiting for this. And of course, Tenet's credibility and motives cannot be called into question. Anyone who does so is part of the sheeple.

What do you have on him?

please do tell.

We have plenty of info on Bush.. of course not enough for the dyed in the wool sheep in the Fox hole.

Fellowship
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #4 of 114
SDW: And the administration's credibility is any better?

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #5 of 114
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

And the administration's credibility is any better?

Just ask Sean Hannity... He will tell you all you need to know... Ask no further questions or you are anti-american....

Fellowship
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #6 of 114
.... someone wants another book deal... \
Par for the course. It's its own cottage industry. For years now.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #7 of 114
Republican supporters get quite mad when people attack the administration - they also like to ridicule people who compare Bush to Hitler.

But the things is - and this is now something we need to face as a matter of the utmost urgency - is that the comparison is not based on crimes, Bush is nowhere near the moral equivalent of Hitler. It is not based on policies. The US is not (yet anyway) a totalitarian State.

It is based on the supporters.

The mindless, unquestioning support for any and every action of this administration without question. THAT is the unique situation in US political history and THAT is the equivalence of the German people in the 1920s and 30s.

In reality Bush and his cronies will probably never be an equivalence to the many dictators we have in the world even today.

But his blind hypnotized supporters far exceed any of the 'enablers' that those dictators have been able to call on. They represent a clear and present danger as they are complicit - if not directly responsible - for the removal of the checks and balances which are essential in any democracy. And they and their mindset will be there long after Bush has gone.

No-one - that is absolutely no-one - is above being accountable.

But Bush's supporters have elevated him and his cohorts to that status.

Will someone try to tell me how that is healthy?
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #8 of 114
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

.... someone wants another book deal... \
Par for the course. It's its own cottage industry. For years now.

What is worse in your view?

A war where people are killed and cronies profit and this very war sold to the American people with lie upon lie.

or

a book is written which shines a light (truth) about a war which was unjustified and how those who wanted this war were planning it before 9/11?


I think one of these two examples above is CLEARLY MUCH WORSE THAN THE OTHER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WAKE UP

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #9 of 114
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Republican supporters get quite mad when people attack the administration - they also like to ridicule people who compare Bush to Hitler.

But the things is - and this is now something we need to face as a matter of the utmost urgency - is that the comparison is not based on crimes, Bush is nowhere near the moral equivalent of Hitler. It is not based on policies. The US is not (yet anyway) a totalitarian State.

It is based on the supporters.

The mindless, unquestioning support for any and every action of this administration without question. THAT is the unique situation in US political history and THAT is the equivalence of the German people in the 1920s and 30s.

In reality Bush and his cronies will probably never be an equivalence to the many dictators we have in the world even today.

But his blind hypnotized supporters far exceed any of the 'enablers' that those dictators have been able to call on. They represent a clear and present danger as they are complicit - if not directly responsible - for the removal of the checks and balances which are essential in any democracy. And they and their mindset will be there long after Bush has gone.

No-one - that is absolutely no-one - is above being accountable.

But Bush's supporters have elevated him and his cohorts to that status.

Will someone try to tell me how that is healthy?


You are correct 100%

I think some in the US are afraid to think for themselves.

They NEED Sean Hannity in order to know what to think / believe.

I don''t know what has led to this fear in America to think on one's own.

Fellowship
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #10 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I was waiting for this. And of course, Tenet's credibility and motives cannot be called into question. Anyone who does so is part of the sheeple.


And of course Bush is so credible.

I see no reason for him to not come out with the truth now!

This is another coffin nail SDW.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #11 of 114
Clearly Tenet is shilling this book to cover his ass for the Hague War Crimes trials. But Richard Clarke indicated this and many other enterprising journalists.

The oil grab for Iraq has been going on since 1914 when the British invaded Iraq to set up a rail line connecting the Orient Express into Baghdad. Also in 1941 during World War II. Since then Iraq (and the Middle East in general) has been taunted, coddled and raped for their prime resource, oil.

In 1975, the Ford administration (remember that Cheney and Rumsfeld were aids to Ford then) received the report prepared by the Congressional Research Service titled "Oil Fields as Military Objectives: A Feasibility Study"...

"The possible use of U.S. military force to occupy foreign oil fields in exigency first surfaced as a serious issue in January 1975. This paper provides perspective, so that the Congress if need be could participate most meaningfully in deliberations to determine the desirability and feasibility of any such action.

Analysis indicates that sustained sanctions by all or most of OPEC's members would disrupt America's fundamental lifestyle and degrade U.S. security, although survival would never be at stake. By way of contrast, the vital interests of our major allies could quickly be compromised.

Any decision to ease agonies at home and (if need be) assist allies would be conditioned by political, economic, social, legal, and moral factors, but if nonmilitary facets were entirely favorable, successful operations would be assured only if this country could satisfy all aspects of a five-part mission:

--Seize required oil installations intact.
--Secure them for weeks, months, or years.
--Restore wrecked assets rapidly.
--Operate all installations without the owner's assistance.
--Guarantee safe overseas passage for supplies and petroleum products.

American abilities to cope with steps one through four would be suspect if sabotage were the only serious threat. U.S. parachute assault forces are too few to cover all objectives quickly. Amphibious forces are too slow. Skilled teams could wreak havoc before we arrived.

Presuming sufficient assets remained intact to serve U.S. interests, long-term security would remain a challenge. Two to four divisions plus substantial support would be tied down for a protracted period.

Shortages in specialized manpower and materials would make damaged facilities hard to repair or replace. Indeed, drafting U.S. civilian workers to supplant foreign counterparts might be mandatory.

Direct intervention by Soviet air/ground forces, a distinct possibility considering the strategic nuclear standoff, might make our mission impossible if we hit in the Middle East. Other areas would be mainly immune from such perils, but Soviet submarines would pose a serious problem if they struck in force--U.S. escort vessels are insufficient to insure safe passage for tankers and supply ships in any area, except the Caribbean.

In short, success would largely depend on two prerequisites:

--Slight damage to key installations.
--Soviet abstinence from armed intervention.

Since neither essential could be assured, military operations to rescue the United States (much less its key allies) from an airtight oil embargo would combine high costs with high risks. U.S. strategic reserves would be stripped. Prospects would be poor, and plights of far-reaching political, economic, social, psychological, and perhaps military consequence the penalty for failure."


This report is the standard that has been used from then to the present. The enemies (USSR) change, but the purpose is clear. Obtain the resources needed to remain a superpower. All well and good, but it's unfortunate that all this money and research wasn't directed to more innovative endeavors such as alternative fuels and automobiles. It's more than that to these powerful people. It's greed and power. And it isn't going to end.

Whenever I hear the "____________ had plans to invade (insert middle east country here) before 9|11" I realize that these persons are ignoring history.
post #12 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

What is worse in your view?

A war where people are killed and cronies profit and this very war sold to the American people with lie upon lie.

or

a book is written which shines a light (truth) about a war which was unjustified and how those who wanted this war were planning it before 9/11?


I think one of these two examples above is CLEARLY MUCH WORSE THAN THE OTHER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WAKE UP

Fellows

um... NOT SLEEPING.

Fellows.. don't leap before you look. I was making a comment concerning the fact that the ex-officios (and their publishers) have begun their own predictable cycle of "whistleblowing" books after the fact. There's a lot of money in it. Take for example Dick Morris, who has made much more than he ever did working for Clinton telling the "truth" about his years with the Clintons. Gary Aldrich the same way.

Its a way for the "little people" to get their personal stock raised so they can make whack cash after the public service life is over. Just look at what "My Life" and the speaking circuit have made for Billy Jeff.

Please, find a judgement before you assume one.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #13 of 114
Quote:
The mindless, unquestioning support for any and every action of this administration without question. THAT is the unique situation in US political history and THAT is the equivalence of the German people in the 1920s and 30s

For the life of me I cannot understand why you insist on clinging to this view of those who support the President. As I've said on several ocassions, the hypocrisy in this statement is amazing. You call Bush supporters blind zealots with a singular point of view. Yet, in a way you have the exact same type of view, only on the opposite side of the spectrum. Supporters of Bush blow your mind. I mean, to you it's so incredibly obvious what a terrible President and human being the man is. How could anyone disagree that was capable of free thought?

Therein lies your problem. In reality, Bush supporters are often far more open minded and capable of rational independent thought than you are. For example, I as a Bush supporter can understand some of the reasons you hate him and his administration. I understand why you dislike the man's policies. I don't agree at all, but I understand. But to you...it's the actual people, not the view that you take issue with. You have the unmitigated arrogance to believe that the only reason they think that way is because they are not intelligent, brainwashed or just not informed as well as you are.

It's a very dangerous mindset you have...believing that anyone who is a free and intelligent thinker will agree with you. However, it does make you feel better yourself I would imagine. At least that's a plus.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #14 of 114
As a disinterested, interested observer from the "Great White North", would Bush or Cheney be as popular as Clinton, around the world, in the speech for money circuit.
Would anyone, other than Jubelum or SDW and their ilk cough up the dough to hear and believe their opinions, beliefs.

I just can't believe the mentality needed to continue to support this administration.
Maybe it's an inbreeding thing.
post #15 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

I just can't believe the mentality needed to continue to support this administration.
Maybe it's an inbreeding thing.

25-30% of the population?

That's a lot of good looking cousins.
post #16 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnJ View Post

25-30% of the population?

That's a lot of good looking cousins.



Yeah, the Religious Right may have some 'splainin to do.
post #17 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

As a disinterested, interested observer from the "Great White North", would Bush or Cheney be as popular as Clinton, around the world, in the speech for money circuit.
Would anyone, other than Jubelum or SDW and their ilk cough up the dough to hear and believe their opinions, beliefs.

I just can't believe the mentality needed to continue to support this administration.
Maybe it's an inbreeding thing.

You assume, child. ASS-U-ME.

Huh Huh, you said "ilk..."

"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #18 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

As a disinterested, interested observer from the "Great White North", would Bush or Cheney be as popular as Clinton, around the world, in the speech for money circuit.
Would anyone, other than Jubelum or SDW and their ilk cough up the dough to hear and believe their opinions, beliefs.

I just can't believe the mentality needed to continue to support this administration.
Maybe it's an inbreeding thing.

You should consider reading posts before spouting off your nonsense. Comprehension is a good thing too.

Of course Bush and Cheney are not popular in the world. But what the hell does that have to do with anything?

Finally, you're guilty of exactly what I posted in my last post re: your perception of Bush supporters.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #19 of 114
I don't often camp on Artman's side of the fence, but his is the best post in the thread thus far.

Is there really anybody that didn't know the U.S. had wanted to rid themselves of Hussein and establish a foothold in the Middle East before 9-11?

And by the way, "the U.S." I'm talking about includes plenty of Democrats as well as Republicans.

As Artman correctly mentions, this kind of thing has been going around a very long time.

I don't really see anything new here and I'm not sure what Fellowship's point is in bringing it up, other than to once again play holier than thou. Certainly both sides have used their positions of power to enrich their friends at the expense of everyone else.

And it's hard to believe Screener actually registered just to admonish "Jubelum and SDW and their ilk."

If you registered simply to take shots at people you disagree with, crawl back under that rock and enjoy the view.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #20 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

I don't often camp on Artman's side of the fence, but his is the best post in the thread thus far.

Thank you. But don't get me wrong, we did have to retaliate this attack (wished we could have prevented actually). What this administration did was let it happen and kick start World War III.
post #21 of 114
They wanted- needed - it to happen, and quite possibly knew it was going to happen. Just like Pearl Harbor, it set other things into mtion, things the admin wanted lacked popular support for. Bang! There's all the support you need.

Who sat reading kiddie books long after the attacks occured, which was a good while after how many planes were hijacked? That the Secret Service did not grab him out of the school shows that at least somebody had a good grasp of the scope of the attacks on 9/11.

Merry Christmas, Mr. Prezident; you got your war.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #22 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Who sat reading kiddie books long after the attacks occured, which was a good while after how many planes were hijacked? That the Secret Service did not grab him out of the school shows that at least somebody had a good grasp of the scope of the attacks on 9/11.

That is the most insane take on the issue I have read in a long while.

It is well known that the Secret Service operates independently of the President concerning his security. The fact that he was not immediately hustled out of a school located in Florida because of an attack taking place in New York only shows that the Service initially thought the attacks were an isolated incident.

Which is what most of us thought as well.

The fact is, if Bush had immediately gone into Presidential-take-charge mode looking like he immediately knew the scope and relevance of the attacks, you might have a case.

Seriously Sego, if you're going to continue to play the conspiracy card, make it plausible.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #23 of 114
NORAD was informed of hijackings at 8:40 and 8:43, with the first impact (8:46) occuring before Bush arrived at the school; another plane was on the loose. The first plane had diverted rather dramatically from its course, as had the second. Another hijacking was just being realized, and the Pentagon's alert status was elevated at 9:00. At 9:05, Andrew Card informed Bush of the second impact going so far as to say "we are under attack", thus ending all possibility in GW's mind of the first crash being an isolated incident. No, it was then a crisis that needed responding to.

And the reading continued.

I was watching CNN live when the second plane hit, and my immediate reaction at the time was that both were premeditated acts part of a larger scheme and that more of something was coming; if someone will go to the trouble to hijack two planes simultaneously and ram them into the same place, they are certainly capable of doing more. It didn't take CNN long, either, to mention that something could be afoot. Their guest Furman who was a NTSB guy, pointed to the clues: good visability, no planes usually in the area, 2 back to back crashes... and this was without the knowledge that others had about the hijackings. He specifically said: FURMAN: I don't think that this represents an accident.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../11/bn.01.html

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #24 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Seriously Sego, if you're going to continue to play the conspiracy card, make it plausible.

Err Frank - I didn't say anything, wtf?
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #25 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

You assume, child. ASS-U-ME.

Huh Huh, you said "ilk..."


I like it.
post #26 of 114
Reminds me of something I heard way back at the beginning of the GW WH:

"It's scary to imagine that the three most important men in America are Dick, Bush and Colin."

Heh heh

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #27 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

You should consider reading posts before spouting off your nonsense. Comprehension is a good thing too.

Of course Bush and Cheney are not popular in the world. But what the hell does that have to do with anything?

Finally, you're guilty of exactly what I posted in my last post re: your perception of Bush supporters.

But would you pay to hear their nonsense?

By not understanding why Bush and Cheney aren't popular, respected, being leaders of the "free world", shows why you don't know "what the hell that has to do with anything".

My perception of Bush supporeters stands.
post #28 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

They wanted- needed - it to happen, and quite possibly knew it was going to happen. Just like Pearl Harbor, it set other things into mtion, things the admin wanted lacked popular support for. Bang! There's all the support you need.

Who sat reading kiddie books long after the attacks occured, which was a good while after how many planes were hijacked? That the Secret Service did not grab him out of the school shows that at least somebody had a good grasp of the scope of the attacks on 9/11.

Merry Christmas, Mr. Prezident; you got your war.

Maybe the Bay of Tonkin is what you meant?
post #29 of 114
Basically the same thing, no? Major incident allows government to proclaim the need for war ad gather the needed support, at least in the short term while tempers are flaring.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #30 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Basically the same thing, no? Major incident allows government to proclaim the need for war ad gather the needed support, at least in the short term while tempers are flaring.

Pearl Harbour was real, Bay of Tonkin was a deception, similar to Tenent's claims.

This is going to expand in importance , well the sh't is going to fly.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=5769537
post #31 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

If you registered simply to take shots at people you disagree with, crawl back under that rock and enjoy the view.

And I thought this is why this forum is here.
Well excusssse me.
post #32 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

That is the most insane take on the issue I have read in a long while.

It is well known that the Secret Service operates independently of the President concerning his security. The fact that he was not immediately hustled out of a school located in Florida because of an attack taking place in New York only shows that the Service initially thought the attacks were an isolated incident.

Which is what most of us thought as well.

The fact is, if Bush had immediately gone into Presidential-take-charge mode looking like he immediately knew the scope and relevance of the attacks, you might have a case.

Seriously Sego, if you're going to continue to play the conspiracy card, make it plausible.


Sorry but I've seen footage of his " Take charge mode ". It looked more like a deer in the headlights to me. Correct me if I'm wrong but he was being briefed during that time. I mean what did he have be told? " Airliners have been hyjacked and are hitting buildings Mr. President ". I saw an aid whispering to him about the incident.

Also once again ( I asked this back in 2001 ) how is it possible that an airliner flew all the way to the Pentagon and crashed into it? You know the center for military operations for the western world. You would have thought it would have been taken out long before that happened regardess of the passengers. I mean look how many more people died because of it. Then of course there's the report that was sent to Mr. Bush prior to this about the possibility of OSBL using airplanes as weapons.

It really kind of suspends one's disbeilef.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #33 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Sorry but I've seen footage of his " Take charge mode ". It looked more like a deer in the headlights to me. Correct me if I'm wrong but he was being briefed during that time. I mean what did he have be told? " Airliners have been hyjacked and are hitting buildings Mr. President ". I saw an aid whispering to him about the incident.

Also once again ( I asked this back in 2001 ) how is it possible that an airliner flew all the way to the Pentagon and crashed into it? You know the center for military operations for the western world. You would have thought it would have been taken out long before that happened regardess of the passengers. I mean look how many more people died because of it. Then of course there's the report that was sent to Mr. Bush prior to this about the possibility of OSBL using airplanes as weapons.

It really kind of suspends one's disbeilef.

Surely.

Flight 77 was commandeered around 08:51 AM, and headed out west as far as Kentucky, then did a 180º, disappeared off FAA radar for awhile, and crashed at 9:38 AM. It was under rogue control for some 47 minutes (!!), flying within a few minutes' scramble time from numerous Air Force bases.

It's bizarre that Hani Hanjour decided to fly so far to the west, and be in the air as a sitting duck for so long before hitting his target. How did he know beforehand that all protocols would be suspended, and he wouldn't get challenged? (Otherwise he would have *surely* have selected at least a slightly more direct route?) Logic?

And nobody was even fired.

*

It defies all bounds of credibility what the "Nellies" will believe and swallow.

"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #34 of 114
post #35 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I was waiting for this. And of course, Tenet's credibility and motives cannot be called into question. Anyone who does so is part of the sheeple.


Give me a fucking break.

Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #36 of 114
"Stop using words that hurt. Start using words that heal."

April is child abuse awareness month. Please take a minute to consider how you can help the countless children who live with abuse of all kinds across the world.

This message brought to you by Alec Baldwin.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #37 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

April is child abuse awareness month.

APRIL is the cruellest month, breeding\t
Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing\t
Memory and desire, stirring\t
Dull roots with spring rain.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #38 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

APRIL is the cruellest month, breeding\t
Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing\t
Memory and desire, stirring\t
Dull roots with spring rain.

Oh, the irony of thou with such dead season'd name
Waxing poetic on the beauties of ressurection!
How the fates bring it about
From midwinter, on to spring again...
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #39 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Oh, the irony of thou with such dead season'd name
Waxing poetic on the beauties of ressurection!
How the fates bring it about
From midwinter, on to spring again...

In the bleak midwinter, frost wind made moan,
earth stood hard as iron, water like a stone;
snow had fallen, snow on snow, snow on snow,
in the bleak midwinter, long ago.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #40 of 114
NERD JOKE ALERT:

And by the way: "thou" is a little presumptuous, don't you think.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Bush Cheney wanted to invade Iraq before 9/11