|
If the radios aren't working, you can't assume it is terrorists ESPECIALLY before 9/11. Also, Bush didn't know about this terror attack, end of discussion. He might have got wind that there might be a terror attack involving planes or something which might be why he told people not to fly, but he didn't know that 19 muslims were going to hijack 4 planes and crash them into shit. I don't even recall him telling people not to fly on planes, so if you could give me a link or something it might be makes your post more "accurate."
blackjack, i honestly think that u are smart, and rather logical, but i think u have a pre-determined view of something, and not open to accept something that might completely change your mindstate on the world. you have said that bush might have gotten wind of something happening. now, to not complicate the matter, my posts can be seperated into 2 categories, those refuting posts from other users, and those further explaining my original point, in which i will make a final outline for when im done. this post, is refuting other users posts. now, back to the topic.. u think that bush might have gotten wind of something happening envolving planes. well, bush DID get wind.
"President Bush's daily intelligence briefings in the weeks leading up to the September 11 terror attacks included a warning of the possibility that Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network would attempt to hijack a U.S.-based airliner" - CNN
"President Bush was warned in a more specific way than previously known about intelligence suggesting that al Qaeda terrorists were seeking to attack the United States, a report on the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks indicated yesterday" - msnbc
so, he WAS warned of something happening, involving airliners. no travel advisory was issued...
u say that there was no way of knowing that 19 hijackers would hijack planes?
on september 6th, 4 airlines were hijacked by "radical" muslims. this was not 2001, but rather 1970.
"On 6 September that year four airliners were seized by the PLFP - the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a radical Palestinian faction." -BBC
you seem to think that the idea of 9-11 was sooo off the mark from what we would expect, that there was no way that we could have known, but this is clearly not the case.
I personally think that people made some mistakes before 9/11. I think more could have been done to prevent it
bingo. why wasnt more done to prevent it? u acknowledge a failure, but dont think that anyone should be held accountable? if i fail at my job, u better believe i will be held accountable, and the lives of thousands, potentially millions are not in my hands.
oh my god. Psylo it must not be hard for you to brain wash people into thinking that Bush is the largest mass murderer in American history. Look at the kind of intelligence that agrees with you.
although u have attempted to be logical, the one thing tha tu have not done is discuss my reasoning. i have explained how the bush administration had policy and idealogy that would involve a catastrophe to happen. i have explained how these "catastopphes" used as public deception, are nothing new to our country. i have explained, and it is clear, that bush has flawlessly continued with the agenda that was made before 9-11, some of which expressly included the overtaking of the saddam regime. u do not argue against this. u just result to insults, and do the very popular, but petty thing, of attacking the name of a web site, rather than its information.
Psylo honestly believes that Bush planted bombs underground without anyone knowing and anyone finding out, and blew up the WTC, while he was at a school reading books to kids. And for that, I feel sorry for him and I am sure all the educated people who read this forum and don't feel like responding feel sorry for him as well.
this is actually not what i believe. i have not yet gotten to explaining some possible conclusions to the matter. but i do not think that bush personally ordered a controlled collapse. i have already said that for the sake of argument, i will back off the controlled collapse issue, if u wish to discuss it, we can also explain how considering the event, a VERY MINUMIL amount of damage was done.
What I'm trying to say is that just because someone writes a book, doesn't mean they're telling the truth, or even close to it.
this goes the same for news articles, politicians, and any other source of information. but by this logic, well.. we cant believe a damn thing. but what we can do, is have a general idea of what is going on in the world, and see what "fits" the puzzle and what does not. the "official story" does not fit the puzzle(puzzle being the functionality of the world), where as my explanation of 9-11 fits it fairly well.
give me GOOD SOLID points proving that the US governement had FAR MORE to gain than to lose,
define government? the bush administration had something to gain. saudi arabia had some thing to gain. isreal had some thing to gain. osama had some thing to gain.
|
U.S. Government, happy now. BTW I am not looking for something to gain, I am looking for U.S. got MORE out it than it lost, because my friend it looks very much the opposite. Please use reliable sources. The sites you post have very little credibility with me, its like hearing a she said he said sorta thing. I mean honestly I couldn't write a paper back in HS using an internet source, even a major one for that matter, and I perfectly understand why.
|
I don't bother arguing with psylo, because its like trying to argue with a war 3 player which is better SC or war3. So if psylo's mind has a pre-determined view on this[...]
i dont have pre-determnined views, i have views that have taken several years to build through learning about the world. i will also mention, that my views over the years have changed. i have stood by all my points, in this debate, and in the rather lengthy iraq debate, becuase no body has come close to providing either decent evedince(although exalibur attempted with links from rush limbaughs site and fox news), or a decent logical argument against my reasoning. i have been called a nut, a freak, a conspiracy nut, etc... but the people calling me such names, have not developed a counter argument to anything that i have said. the iraq argument, and the 9-11 argument, are actually all linked to one veiw point on an idealogy put forth by neoconservatives and zionists. iraq is just a continuation of policy, that was planned before 9-11, that the bush administration has been talking abuot and putting forth for years. 9-11 is just the "pearl harbor like catastrophe" that the PNAC said they needed, in order to carry out there emperilistic conquest.
|
On September 03 2003 07:16 DV8 wrote:
U.S. Government, happy now. BTW I am not looking for something to gain, I am looking for U.S. got MORE out it than it lost, because my friend it looks very much the opposite. Please use reliable sources. The sites you post have very little credibility with me, its like hearing a she said he said sorta thing. I mean honestly I couldn't write a paper back in HS using an internet source, even a major one for that matter, and I perfectly understand why.
i relize u were talking about the US government, i mean, are u talking abuot the government, as in the individuals in government? the infrastructure of our country? the special interests in government? when i say that the the bush administration gained more than lossed, i am not saying america gained more than they lost. i dont think the bush administration represents america or what is best for it. i am saying that the bush administration, along with other powerful people in this country(cough cough, zionist lobby), have something to gain from 9-11, as i have been trying to show. the bush administration gaining from 9-11, does not mean the people of america benefit from 9-11. there was alot of loss and negative effects felt by americans. but NOT BY the bush administration. in fact, 9-11, wheather or not u think they were involved, directly or indirectly(which is what i believe), was exactly what the bush administration needed in order to carry out there plans. i mean, it was perfect...
dont use an internet source? hades already went down this road... u want me to mail u some books and cia reports? i dont know what else u expect me too do. rather than attacking a source just becuase u are not familiar with it, how abuot u attack the information in the source.
btw, HS doesnt teach u a damn thing about how to write.
|
I feel really really sorry for blackjack lol tsk tsk.. thats really all im going to say.. if u remember this later in life u'll understand... but right now go ahead and laugh and flame.. i'll get the last laugh
|
You obviously don't know the facts since you think we murdered our own troops in Pearl Harbor. and I was simply saying that if people got you to believe that we killed our own troops in Pearl Harbor simply so we could go to war with Japan than it wouldn't be hard for someone to make you believe that we bombed our own civilians to go to war with Iraq.
The funniest thing about all of the posts read is that Psylo continues to say "we dont know who to blame for the hijackings" etc. even after Al Queda and Osama Bin Laden admin to it. I honestly believe that if Osama Bin Laden debated psylo 1on1, he wouldn't be able to get psylo to believe that he destroyed the towers and not Bush.
i never said the US attacked its own soldeirs. i said that it was provoked by FDR, and he allowed it to happen. read up on the matter before u pass judgement. u are not arguing aginst my point, but only twisting my words, in order to try to change the meaning of my point, in which is easier for your to argue against.
osama DIDNT admit to 9-11 until months AFTER 9-11. and this was only on a tape, that the US "found", and was translated by the US government. yes, i have a watch to sell you. the credibility of this tape is in question:
Swiss Lab finds tape to be a fake
now, after watching the video, this is not much of a surprise... since this tape, osama has not directly admitted to the attacks, but has only praised them.
some how u are under the impression that i WANT to believe what i do. you are a fool if u think i WANT to live under such a government that i do, and in such a world. but, the fact is that i do, and i beleive things CAN change, but only if people learn about what is really happening in the world, and take action. apparently the former part is extremely difficult for most of u.
|
but what i dont understand is why you guys are so hostile to even TRY to accept whats being presented to u.. as soon as u read it ur mind instantly says NO.. this is false bush isnt a murderer ect... i guess thats how patriots are.. i mean i didnt think bush was a murderer prior and even a while after 9-11... but i was enlightened u could say on some facts.. that i didnt just DISmISS and it helped me change my opinion on him.. BUSH = Murderer. PERIOD
|
why are the usa allowed to have nuclear bomb when they are the only country that actually used it?
the manipulation that is taking place is just descpicable and politics is just a horrific field filled with lies and deception
|
lol the 2nd part of ur post is 100% true.. but the first part is just stupid.. u can answer that with common sense, firstly... We had the bomb first.. 2ndly wtf... if they can take away such a weapon from us and leave it in the hands of basically EVERY other country in the world how long do u expect us to last??? 5 weeks?
|
Patriotism is not blind allegiance, psylo is being more of a patriot by wanting whats best for the people of america, which in this case is the truth behind 9/11. And blackjack please stop pulling supposed facts out of your ass and stating them as the truth.
|
Russian Federation1233 Posts
wow, Tech)Psylo, I've never seen anyone put so much effort into any discussion on this forum. I might not agree with you POV (I'm not going to engage the discussion tho as it takes much more time than I can afford) but the work you've done gives you a HUGE credit 
respect, man 
|
Canada5062 Posts
On September 02 2003 21:23 SerotoninsGone wrote:
I believe you severely underestimate north korea. I would think that several of the south korean members on this forum could easily speak up on this point. North Korea has enough conentional weapons to completely level south korea--nukes are just icing on the cake. As such, we cannot deal with him like saddam--the only agreeable solution is a diplomatic one. Which is why we are so adamantly trying to get china to do something about them--it's their backyard anyway.
I wasn't taking sides in this debate, but when it comes to North Korea I feel a few misconceptions about the whole issue needs to be sorted out.
There was actually a longish thread on this very topic a while ago. I recommend people read it before opening their mouths about subjects they have only a very superficial understanding of. It begins right here.
|
On September 03 2003 07:23 TeCh)PsylO wrote: Show nested quote +On September 03 2003 07:16 DV8 wrote:
U.S. Government, happy now. BTW I am not looking for something to gain, I am looking for U.S. got MORE out it than it lost, because my friend it looks very much the opposite. Please use reliable sources. The sites you post have very little credibility with me, its like hearing a she said he said sorta thing. I mean honestly I couldn't write a paper back in HS using an internet source, even a major one for that matter, and I perfectly understand why. i relize u were talking about the US government, i mean, are u talking abuot the government, as in the individuals in government? the infrastructure of our country? the special interests in government? when i say that the the bush administration gained more than lossed, i am not saying america gained more than they lost. i dont think the bush administration represents america or what is best for it. i am saying that the bush administration, along with other powerful people in this country(cough cough, zionist lobby), have something to gain from 9-11, as i have been trying to show. the bush administration gaining from 9-11, does not mean the people of america benefit from 9-11. there was alot of loss and negative effects felt by americans. but NOT BY the bush administration. in fact, 9-11, wheather or not u think they were involved, directly or indirectly(which is what i believe), was exactly what the bush administration needed in order to carry out there plans. i mean, it was perfect... dont use an internet source? hades already went down this road... u want me to mail u some books and cia reports? i dont know what else u expect me too do. rather than attacking a source just becuase u are not familiar with it, how abuot u attack the information in the source. btw, HS doesnt teach u a damn thing about how to write.
Oh how can I be so silly as to forget all the bush administration has to do to cater to its own needs and the votes just come rolling in. Right, listen here, the bush administration needs the votes of many agendas and the general populace as well or bye bye republicans, and in all honesty I can't seem to find why they need a 9-11 in order to appease this small sect. They would have been better off without a 9-11 and buying up unions.
BTW psylo, I am skeptical of your news source, because it does not have the CREDIBILITY I am looking for, and I hope you can grasp the definition of that word. You are probably pushing these sources because they back your own view or you are a trusting fool whose worse than those who buy the bush administration's propaganda word for word.
So please psylo expand your line of thought and look at the whole picture, than try to explain how the OUR government aka "bush administration" will gain more than it will lose cause of 9-11, because if you can't prove that, than your conspiracy theory doesn't hold water.
|
and exactly what is a credible source? Is Fox News or CNN credible, even though they report slanted half truths?
|
On September 03 2003 11:17 SoLsiTO wrote:
and exactly what is a credible source? Is Fox News or CNN credible, even though they report slanted half truths? not my fault you can't tell the difference between a half truth and actual news. BTW a credible source does not have to be a news source.
|
what u guys talkin abt? 11/9 was just a adversity that rarely happens, its just such a tiny bit compare to u American ppl flatted their entire country... thnk abt it
|
"(i base this on every european i've met and from several relatives that have lived in germany, france and russia for a few years). it shows up in every form of life, from obeying traffic lights to listening when the government makes a public address. particularly the traffic light thing really gets me. when the crosswalk starts flashing red--they just won't walk...).
"
What kind of europeans did you meet ? teenagers ? You cannot affirm you know a whole people just by meeting few teenagers...And they stop crossing a road when the lights are red? Maybe the traffic is so crazy in their country that they HAVE to stop otherwise they would DIE, then do it everywhere by reflex...So quick conclusions, amazing...
nothing to see with the topic but this point: people think they know others without trying to really know or speak with them...Generalization is a bitch.
|
On September 03 2003 13:17 ProudToBeANoob wrote:
"(i
"
What kind of europeans did you meet ? teenagers ? You cannot affirm you know a whole people just by meeting few teenagers...And they stop crossing a road when the lights are red? Maybe the traffic is so crazy in their country that they HAVE to stop otherwise they would DIE, then do it everywhere by reflex...So quick conclusions, amazing...
.
lol i was listening to some girl from Iran or somewhere who was on the radio with whoever runs the radio show and she was talking about what it was like to be in america. She says "people actually stop at traffic lights!" "Even when there is nobody coming"
|
Rea, (regarding one of your posts in the thread you linked) might I remind you that the Nazi's has superior tanks in WWII, but they were steamrolled by the mass produced, cheaply made tanks of the Soviets. 15 0-0 tanks will beat 5 3-3 tanks and thats all there is to it. The might of the U.S. Military is based on both technology and numbers.
One more thing:
A credible source of information is simply one that is worth investigating; as even credible sources can be telling lies. That is the point I was trying to make about the book, earlier, written by Cromwell. He had a real publisher, the book was widely publicized, but it was still a lie. The simple fact is that people in this world have agendas, and some will go to despicable lengths to acheive them; I think that is, in effect, the point Psylo is trying to make. The difficulty, then, is trying to distinguish between fact and fiction, which is very difficult indeed. In this day and age, its hard to trust pretty much any source completely. You Europeans say our news channels are inefficient and incomplete; I say yours are biased and present a skewed view of American life, and Americans in general.
But there is a common goal somewhere in the underlying scheme of things; we're all trying to do what we think is best. So lets take that and build upon it, find the truth, and stop arguing with one another. Particularly the pointless flaming.
|
"The difficulty, then, is trying to distinguish between fact and fiction, which is very difficult indeed. In this day and age, its hard to trust pretty much any source completely."
diffucult yes, but as of now there has been no attempt on the part of people who so easily disclaim me and my sources, to run background checks on any of the info or sources i have provided. i find this to be one of the biggest mental copouts i have ever run across. how can u feel so strongly abuot something(in this case, against me), when u (not directed at u obsolete) havnt even done your "homework". people have attacked my sources. but, what source do they have for what they beleive to be true? the bush administration? proven to have forged documents and lied? and what about the many news sources i provided from corporate outlits, like wallstreet journal, reuters, cnn, msnbc, etc... are those only credible when they go along with the bush administrations propaganda? and what if, i had a un-known news source, that did go along with the bush administration, would that be credible? the super paranoid idea that the web is filled with lies and conspiracy is just a bit overblown. the web is the BEST source of current events and objective commentary. i have yet to see anyone who has attacked my sources, show me where the info is wrong.
for example, my last link was about the osama tape, where he allegedly took credit for 9-11 was of an article in the toronto star. the toronto star is the largest daily newspaper in canada. it is owned by torstar, which is a company activly traded on the stock market. but, just becuase most americans havny heard of it, and it does not agree with bush;s offical story, it is counted as uncredible. do your homework kids..
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
