We, the misinformed...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2003Sep5.html
I´ll take bets on how many that thinks it was Kim Jong-Il or Khatami two years from now
I´ll take bets on how many that thinks it was Kim Jong-Il or Khatami two years from now
Comments
Some people believe OJ is innocent even though there is nothing to suggest he is.
Originally posted by Scott
Huh?
Saddam just wanted to stay in power. He was ensured that as long as everything was satus quo. doing anything to US wound not have been status quo!
Saddam on 9112001: "Damn!"
Originally posted by Scott
Just because people believe something doesn't mean they were misinformed.
Willfully, or unwillingly, ignorant. I believe that's the correct expression.
Originally posted by Scott
Just because people believe something doesn't mean they were misinformed. Saddam had many good reason to attack the US.
Some people believe OJ is innocent even though there is nothing to suggest he is.
Yes, but those who think he is innocent are contradicted by good evidence; they are misinformed.
Those who think Saddam had anything to do with 9-11 are contradicted by evidence that includes 'the bleeding obvious' (aka logic).
Al-Qaeda were a threat to Saddam's regime.
Originally posted by Scott
It doesn't have to be ignorance. People think that the Saudis had much to do with 9-11 but there is no hard fact there. It's still reasonable to believe it though.
Scott: DO YOU believe that saddam was involved in 911? If not do you believe that it is beyond any reasonable doubt that he was?
Really looking forward to the answers...
Originally posted by Harald
Yes, but those who think he is innocent are contradicted by good evidence; they are misinformed.
Not misinformed; the judge did declare him innocent (not in the civil case though.)
Originally posted by Scott
People think that the Saudis had much to do with 9-11 but there is no hard fact there. It's still reasonable to believe it though.
Fifteen of the hijackers had visas issued in Saudi Arabia. This doesn't mean that the Saudi government sponsored them but why more opprobrium was reserved for the poor French than the Saudis is kinda weird.
Originally posted by segovius
Why is it any more reasonable than Mossad or CIA or any of the other 'fringe loon' theories ?
Actually a belief in the Saudi connection is by definition an admission that Bush is lying and an accessory for the following reasons:
1) Evacuation of Bin Laden's family and other Saudi nationals immediately after 911. This must have had top-level authorisation as air space was clamped down and they were private chartered jets.
100% False. You have proven to me that you are full of lies and have no ability to question the utter bullshit that's fed to you. I can't believe people still repeat this utter crap LIE! (talk about "misinformed"
Originally posted by segovius
If the Saudis were not involved then ok but if they were.....
2) If the Saudi connection is real then someone in the Govt is suppressing that. It is not being investigated and the buck stops at the Oval Office. Simple as that.
Unknowable. The SA "government" is a large organization. It may very well be that one had didn't know what the other was doing. Since then the US may have secured the "cooperation" of that hand.
Originally posted by segovius
3) Saudi connection means no al-Q connection and vice versa. Therefore if its Saudis then Bush is lying about the al-Q evidence that he said he possessed but never produced.
This is just dumb. OBL is a Saudi. It's know that SA "government" was paying him off to be left alone. He also has wide popularity there.
Originally posted by segovius
4) A belief that the Saudis backed 911 is contradictory to US govt beliefs and the 'evidence' that they produce to support them. Such as it is. Therefore you must believe they are lying.
Huh? What are you trying to say here?
Originally posted by segovius
Those are the logical reasons. But as it happens they don't actually matter because in this game all that counts is that you have a bin marked 'bad guys' and you put your 'bad guy' in it and hey presto all the guys in the bin are all miraculously linked !!
There's not a lot of logic in your reply. Plus you blew it so bad on #1 being an outright fabrication . get your facts worked out and then come back.
Originally posted by bunge
Not misinformed; the judge did declare him innocent (not in the civil case though.)
No the jury found him not guilty. And we know they did that not because he was not guilty.
Originally posted by Scott
And we know they did that not because he was not guilty.
Because, under the law, he was innocent. That doesn't mean he didn't kill her, just that he's innocent.
Even if Saddam DID help orchestrate 9/11 - which there is no evidence he did - that was NOT the rationale for bringing war to his country. The Bush Administration never said "we believe Saddam Hussein was a key player in 9/11; this is payback." They said he had WMD, is part of the axis of evil, blah blah blah.
Context is everything. We didn't invade his country under the context of payback for 9/11. Ranking officials saying this NOW, is basically an admission that their reasons were hollow / partially fabricated / or just plain wrong. So they need a new PR tack.
Regarding North Korea:
I watched a DTC special on North Korea last night - mostly a historical perspective rather than focusing on the nuclear thing - and it is some SCARY SHIT. Bush and his advisers were very unwise not to continue on with the diplomatic path started by Madeline Albright and at least see where it could lead. Instead Bush needed another "big, bad enemy" to stand against in the public eye, so he alienated N. Korea in his speaches.
Which, if you understand the history of Kim Il Sung and his son, you know is a very stupid thing to do. It's one thing to villianize a clown like Hussein in public speaches, because his reactions are predictable. He'll go out on a balcony and shoot a rifle, wave to the crowds, call us "The Great Satan" and be done with it. Kim Jung Il is NOT like Saddam Hussein. Aside from having no interest in photo opportunities for western media (i.e. his image outside his own country is of secondary interest to him - at best) he is smarter, more calculating and potentially much more ruthless than Hussein.
He SURE AS HELL is a LOT more dangerous than Saddam ever was, even without nuclear weapons. He can turn Seoul and much of South Korea into a puddle of blood and body parts, with nothing more than conventional weapons if he felt threatened. This guy is not a political clown like Hussein; he truly believes he's on some sort of crusade / mission from God / His Father. His armies make the Republican guard look like the Trench Coat Mafia. I frankly would feel MUCH better if someone other than the Bush Administration were dealing with this guy.
This isn't cowboys and injuns anymore, George. Pull your head out....
The goal should be to keep the situation in Pyongyang calm at all costs.
Originally posted by Scott
This is just dumb. OBL is a Saudi. It's know that SA "government" was paying him off to be left alone. He also has wide popularity there.
Known?
Link?
Taptaptaptaptaptap.
Originally posted by Moogs
This guy is not a political clown like Hussein; he truly believes he's on some sort of crusade / mission from God / His Father.
Are you talking about GWB here?
Originally posted by segovius
CBS
Wrong
Originally posted by segovius
Reuters
Wrong
Originally posted by segovius
Patrick tyler - NY Times
Wrong
Originally posted by segovius
Guess you know better though.
I do.
Claim: _ Secret flights whisked bin Laden family members out of the U.S. over the objection of the FBI two days after the September 11 attacks, while a general ban on air travel was still in effect, and before the FBI had any opportunity to question them.
Status: _ Multiple ? see below
Originally posted by segovius
Guess you need it spelling out: If the Saudis are suspects (and in your mind they are) and the Govt is not investigating then there is a reason for that. If the Govt still claims that someone other than the Saudis was responsible for 911 then that means either they or the other claimants are wrong.
Get that hamster running on the wheel in your head up to full speed for this one. Okay? It could be that the Saduis are involved along with other groups.
Originally posted by segovius
Who fabricated #1 ? Me or the US media ? I know it wasn't me and the links prove it (unless I faked em myself) so how come they got there then ?
Any links proving the 'falsehood' (love that word !) ? Thought not.
Next.....
Looks like Michael Moore started it. Surprise surprise. As always he was mostly wrong and only have a thread of truth. What's new?
The links Segovius picked don't actually claim that planes left the country until the airports reopened. They do claim that, while flights were banned, there were a series of flights that went around the US picking people up and taking them to a secret place in Texas.
So what, do tell us, do you know that was wrong in those links please Scott? Be as specific as you like.
Segovius didn't claim that either. Have a read.
We are however to believe that, according to Scott's link, that the "flights were conducted in a hush-hush manner, and the U.S. government didn't (and still hasn't) officially acknowledged their existence" ... their destination was secret, but to call them 'secret' is, according to Scott, a lie. They were 'hush-hush' you see.
edit: you see his MO? Someone makes a claim, verified by Reuters NYT and CBS; Scott chooses to debunk someone ELSE's claim -- a different one -- and uses the mighty 'Snopes' to do so. He adds a little dig at another enemy in the process. Coulter would be proud.
Let's start an 'AI Court Jester Nomination Thread.'
1) Evacuation of Bin Laden's family and other Saudi nationals immediately after 911. This must have had top-level authorisation as air space was clamped down and they were private chartered jets.
Scott:
100% False. You have proven to me that you are full of lies and have no ability to question the utter bullshit that's fed to you. I can't believe people still repeat this utter crap LIE! (talk about "misinformed" )
Scott's proudly quoted source:
In the two days immediately following the September 11 terrorist attacks on America, the U.S. government allowed bin Laden family members to fly within the country during a general ban on air travel: _ True.
Originally posted by Harald
Don't worry everyone, Scott IS bullshitting.
The links Segovius picked don't actually claim that planes left the country until the airports reopened. They do claim that, while flights were banned, there were a series of flights that went around the US picking people up and taking them to a secret place in Texas.
So what, do tell us, do you know that was wrong in those links please Scott? Be as specific as you like.
...
Let' s see
CBS
Two dozen members of Osama bin Laden's family were urgently evacuated from the United States in the first days following the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, according to the Saudi ambassador to Washington.
Wrong.
Reuters "news"
Members of Osama bin Laden's family were allowed to fly out of the US shortly after the September 11 terror attacks ...
Wrong.
NYT source
"In the first days after the attacks on Sept. 11, the Saudi Arabian ambasador to Washington, Prince Bandar ibn Sultan, supervised the urgent evacuation of 24 members of Osama bin Laden's extended family from ther United States ...
Wrong.
So ... it's wrong. When the "news" sources report things that aren't true then they are wrong. It's simple.