Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by PatsFanForever, Nov 5, 2007.
How many of you believe that 9/11 was the cause of the US Government?
Not only don't I believe it, this is the most absurd conspiracy theory since, well, the locals' resurrection of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, or sentiments to that effect, here on this board.
I think it's nuts.
There's a difference between thinking "huh." about one or another aspect of 9/11, and buying into a fairy tale spun to connect all the dots. There's no data to support the US government being "behind" 9/11, yet there is a terriffic amount of evidence that a bunch of pissed off foreign nationals got on planes with box cutters, took over the controls, and flew them into buildings.
Very strange happenings to come up with "alternate" interpretations for.
Now, if you asked whether it were possible for US to take 10 years to get out of Iraq in 2003, I would have told you you were nuts, as well.
We have beaten this whole thing to death and the lines are very clearly drawn, if you want to know how most of us feel and how we all act when we are confronted search the posts.. we have done this about 20 times on this board.. usually around the anniversary of 9-11.
I think the Bush administration was looking for a rationale to initiate its neocon foreign policy, so was not highly focused on stopping terrorism. I don't think they for a moment expected something on the scale of 9/11.
As many righties have said, Clinton should have and had every reason to do more to stop Al Qaeda. If that's true, why didn't Bush do anything during his first 8 months?
OK, OK...that's enough.
It wasn't an inside job. It was simply something that no one ever saw coming. Plain and simple, terrorism wasn't considered to be a threat capable of such death and destruction inside our own borders. It was a genuine wake up call to how savage some animals are. Of course, ultra partisan Patters wants to blame the Bush Adminstration as being complicent. He'd never want to lay any blame on his boy Slick Willy. Personally, I think 9/11 was just a matter of our government working at it's typical efficiency. Spend lots of money, do little, and getting caught with it's pants down. As usual, the result is more money, for just as little, and the American Citizen again paying the price.
That part you got partly right.
If, as many righties claim, Clinton didn't do all he should have done to stop Al Qaeda, why didn't Bush take some concrete steps during his first 8 months?
Those righties who blame Clinton are FoS or Bush made a decision not to do more because he
(1) felt Clinton had done enough
(2) believed an attack would facilitate his neocon plan (though never expected one so big) or
(3) he was simply inept, and the righties applied a double standard to attack Clinton and defend Bush.
Possibility 2 is as likely as the other possibilities.
Giddy-up cowboy........... Let's make this story hunt
I don't believe the government was involved in 9-11.
I do believe that Napolian is behind the muddled post order here at Pats Fans.
Put me down as 1/2 a conspiracy theorist.
Well then, as long as the Republicans screwed up more than the Democrats you're happy huh?
That's not my point, but it does give me some satisfaction when I find evidence that supports my views and exposes the hypocrisy of those who disagree with me. That's only natural.
No one except the scummy muslim ****bag is to blame for 9/11.The only people who purposely target innocents to get their point across.........Nuke them all..................Ronald Reagan must be rolling in his grave at the way his country has given in to the fact that we could be victimized ,at will, by another country the size of maine.......................:rocker:
Ronald Reagan --You mean the man who cut and run from Lebanon after terrorists killed over 200 Marines?
Who's blaming Clinton soley? I've said all along that it was the fault of both sides, and that I don't think anyone truly thought the threat was capable of an attack as we saw on 9/11. I will say that the policy's in place from UBL's first attack, and subsequent attacks were insufficient. GW obviously gets blame because it happened while he was president, but Slick Willy didn't exactly do much in the years he was at the helm. I give more blame to the guy who had years, than the person who didn't, but I lay blame to all persons involved. That being said, for someone to insinuate that it was all part of a plan to "facilitate a neo con plan" is ridiculous.
Hey, you're going to piss on Mr. Sdaniels with that picture, and I want my 2 cents. <------------ (Green Smiley)
Actually Its really only you who posts the same pics over and over. You may wanna not drag every little dig you suffer onto every other thread that gets posted here. It kinda blows a hole in that laid back, too cool for school persona you shoot to portray here.
anyhow, anyone who's read the 9-11 Commission's report (or even parts of it), the Kean Commission (despite its glaring ommissions), or the book "Crossing the Rubicon" would have a hard time rationalizing to themselves, or anyone, that the world got the 'WHOLE STORY' regarding 9/11 (both that day, and the months leading up to it)... there is a mountain, A MOUNTAIN, of evidence that dictates that a criminal investigation should most certainly have been opened regarding obstruction, or at least dubious negligence by our "protectors"...
if that does nothing to make you stop and think, then at least consider the neocons' writings in the PNAC, or better yet, Zbigniew Brzezski's The Grand Chessboard, and then try and tell us that the series of events the past 6 years is all mere "coincidence"...
i do not buy the "controlled detonation" theory, or unmanned planes theory... but i most certainly believe a smaller-than-you-might-think cabal in Washington had information that something specific was quite imminent, and did nothing/little about it... even so far as to question whether NORAD was under orders of deliberate confusion, bordering on supression ... the inordinate "put options" on wall street the week before are another fascinating tell... (a huge portion of those 'puts' were never claimed, by the way... for obvious reasons)...
oil, citizens... it's oil... accept it...
it's worth mentioning again... AQ was in Afghanistan, our government chased him out, then refocused elsewhere... it waited over 40 days to get special troops on the ground in that Afghanistan, and finally the CIA cornered our attacker and many of his most important henchmen... it then refused to block them within in a valley region, and let them slip away into another country, before redeploying a majority of our relevant special forces away to another country that never attacked us -- a country that had absolutely no significant role in 9/11.... no matter how desperately 24 percenters wanna insist it so...
"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing eventâ€“â€“like a new Pearl Harbor" - PNAC...
i mean... are you kidding me? are you absolutely kidding me? ... when does the average american stop denying it to themselves?
What did Bush do regarding Al Qaeda during his first 8 months? (Please provide some examples.)
Holdovers from the Clinton administration did more than Bush during Bush's first 8 months?
Separate names with a comma.