Home Politics & Debate
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Generation 911

2»

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Clandestine
    Ah yes, Western "Imposed" Democracy, A contradiction in terms ever there was one and something which will be a recipe for instability and disaster for the region.

    You mean like the ones in Germany, Japan, South Korea and Thailand? :D
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Thinking you can appease tyrants is something Europe should have learned. But then this isn't really about appeasement is it. It's about the billion and a half US dollar French deal with Iraq..right?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I could give a rats arse about French investments frankly. This is about undermining the multilateral frameworks whcih have kept the peace in the world for more than half a century and the hypocrisy of our current leadership which doles out half truths that are completely sanitized of any reference to our long term unquestioning support for the atrocities that Bush now parades as a pretest for war.

    So by the rules of jurisprudence, given our complicity with Saddam, we too should be invaded and our leaders overthrown as accomplices to gross atrocities and crimes against humanity.

    If we are to be consistent to Bush's own standard that is.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Wrapping yourself in international law while you're making deals that are in fact violating the UN's oil for food and medicine program doesn't cut it Clan. We see through the French this time.

    I do listen to you by the way. (Although some of my friends think you're a spy.)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    A spy! lol. Now thats something ill have to tell the family back home when next I speak to them. Your friends have vivid imaginations thats for sure. Dont think Id have much time to be posting on any boards if I was a spy, pay might even be better than what I currently earn though. :lol:

    Your friends need to get out and learn about the world outside instead of believing what they see on tv as much as you do I think. Yet I can't say you don't often put a smile on my face. ;)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Clandestine
    A spy! lol. Now thats something ill have to tell the family back home when next I speak to them. Your friends have vivid imaginations thats for sure. Dont think Id have much time to be posting on any boards if I was a spy, pay might even be better than what I currently earn though. :lol:

    Which raises an interesting question:

    1) What do you do?
    2) Why (and how) do you post so much?)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Clandestine
    I could give a rats arse about French investments frankly. This is about undermining the multilateral frameworks whcih have kept the peace in the world for more than half a century and the hypocrisy of our current leadership which doles out half truths that are completely sanitized of any reference to our long term unquestioning support for the atrocities that Bush now parades as a pretest for war.

    Dunno about you, but I'm still waiting for the moment that the French say that they are opposed to war because of their economic links with Iraq.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Bingo MOK. Then I'd respect them.

    Well, not really.:rolleyes:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why should the French government (or any other government for that matter)come clean about why it adopts any given position with respect to the impending war when the main protagonists of the war refuse to?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Clandestine
    Why should the French government (or any other government for that matter)come clean about why it adopts any given position with respect to the impending war when the main protagonists of the war refuse to?

    Everything is the fault of the United States, eh?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Greenhat


    Everything is the fault of the United States, eh?



    Always is. Were such an evil nation.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No we're not an evil nation, we just have a corrupt and self serving administration, but then you right wingers just love to avoid facing that by making any criticism of the government a slant against the common man so long as we're not criticising Democrats. Youd not last two minutes in any substantive debate that much is clear. :lol:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Clandestine
    Youd not last two minutes in any substantive debate that much is clear. :lol:

    Says you.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Given the fact that any official debate would require a focus on the issue(s) being debated, the tactic of equating the administration's policies with the character of the citizenry (which is in itself laughable given the plurality of the national population) would indeed expose the hollowness of whichever side employed it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Clandestine
    Given the fact that any official debate would require a focus on the issue(s) being debated, the tactic of equating the administration's policies with the character of the citizenry (which is in itself laughable given the plurality of the national population) would indeed expose the hollowness of whichever side employed it.

    Then you will, of course, accede that the tactic of focusing on the misadministration and cited references to conspiracist and dubious websites, as well as continually decrying the administration for just being the administration, ignoring their policies, would also expose the hollowness of a side who chose to employ it, will you not?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If in fact that was the case I would so concede, however there have been quite a number of valid aspects of the administration's policies as well as legitimate questioning of events raised by analyses to which I have provided links (and which are raised by respected agencies, not lone conspiracy nuts, if you truly read through all Ive submitted). The fact that many wish to ignore the thoroughness with which any criminal investigation should be conducted, the fact that this administration has specifically asked Congress on at least two occasions not to investigate or has refused to cooperate with investigations in other areas (Enron, the Anthrax attacks of last, etc.) signals a willingness to accept media spin in lieue of conclusive probes into all the unanswered questions plaguing this administration.

    Since your reference is obviously aimed at my suspicions of 9/11, do you not think that the victims and their families, let alone the nation and indeed the world deserve to have all the inconsistencies of the cover story addressed fully? We currently have more time, energy and resources being brought to bear to investigate the how's and why's of the Columbia disaster than were made on behalf of an event that claimed the lives of many many more people.

    So, Id have to maintain that the substance of many issues remain to be adequately accounted for by this administration.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Clandestine
    If in fact that was the case I would so concede, however there have been quite a number of valid aspects of the administration's policies as well as legitimate questioning of events raised by analyses to which I have provided links (and which are raised by respected agencies, not lone conspiracy nuts, if you truly read through all Ive submitted).

    Now, you see, I did read what you submitted. And if there is evidence provided in a balanced and respectable way, then I will accept it, or at least consider it.

    However, when you post this evidence from clearly conspiracist sites (Hell, Bush as a devil-worshipping Masonic Illuminati?) then it is sharply discredited by association, as well you can understand.
    The fact that many wish to ignore the thoroughness with which any criminal investigation should be conducted, the fact that this administration has specifically asked Congress on at least two occasions not to investigate or has refused to cooperate with investigations in other areas (Enron, the Anthrax attacks of last, etc.) signals a willingness to accept media spin in lieue of conclusive probes into all the unanswered questions plaguing this administration.

    Do you (yes/no answer, if you please) believe that the US government is involved with either the attacks on the WTC or the anthrax episodes? Involved as in "helped to bring them about by direct intervention", not involved via historical precedent or neo-imperialistic tendencies.
    Since your reference is obviously aimed at my suspicions of 9/11, do you not think that the victims and their families, let alone the nation and indeed the world deserve to have all the inconsistencies of the cover story addressed fully? We currently have more time, energy and resources being brought to bear to investigate the how's and why's of the Columbia disaster than were made on behalf of an event that claimed the lives of many many more people.

    So, Id have to maintain that the substance of many issues remain to be adequately accounted for by this administration.

    Do you know why Columbia came down? I would suspect not.

    However, one could postulate that the WTC attacks were brought about by the airliners, no? I mean, did I miss something?

    Planes crash in to tower.

    Tower collapses.

    Is there much more to it than that?

    I know some of the references you posted. I know the FEMA officials were in the area before, or whatever. But you think there's more to it than that?

    The substance of issues may well have to be substantiated. However, name me any administration that has ever fully released all documentation on time, ever co-operated fully, or suchlike?

    Your careful paranoia is amusing, especially when it is so contrasted with Globe et al's outlook. This is not to say that either of you are right or wrong. Both of you have respective merits; both of you have weaknesses to the case. You both refuse to accept each others' points.

    Globe et al. are mocked for expecting us to believe them on the grounds of what they say. You are not much better. We know little of what you do, or your pespective, only that you trust nothing and no-one.

    However, it is equally unfair to suggest that I think little of your comments. I respect the thoughts behind them, just wish that you would moderate some of your suspicions with a temperance of realism.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Fair enough. However, concerning your point about masonic references or devil worship, I think you need to go back and consider the specific article to which i linked to in that instance. Citing one bogus site, at any rate, begs the issue of the many other substantial and credible analyses I provided links to.

    As for do I believe that the administration had anything to do with 911 whether actively or with knowledge aforesight, yes and will likely continue to hold that suspicion until it passes from the public consciousness or a legitimate investigation is conducted with adequate answers to the inconsistencies.

    And no its not as simple as two planes crash and towers come down, which you would know if you did some detailed research into the event and the fact that both planes did not dump their fuel directly into the each building to warrant the sorts of conflagrations that were claimed. Also the fact that if the cover story were true, then why did the second building hit crumble first despit the fact that it was the one hit at an angle with less fuel burning inside (the vast majority of fuel spraying out over the area in a giant fireball) whilst the first building, which had recieved a direct hit and had been burning for an hour already, crumbled sometime after the second one did?

    In fact, I came across this report which you might find of interest...

    http://www.americanfreepress.net/07_14_02/Unexplained_9-11_/unexplained_9-11_.html

    or this:

    http://www.americanfreepress.net/Conspiracy/Fire_Engineers_Call_WTC_Probe/fire_engineers_call_wtc_probe.html

    Or to make it a hattrick:

    http://www.americanfreepress.net/10_22_01/Some_Survivors_Say__Bombs_Expl/some_survivors_say__bombs_expl.html

    Can I say conclusively there was collusion? No. But if you consider the convenience and alarming speed with which the media provided us with a nice cover story, the specific request of Bush to Daschle not to investigate, and the fact that even many of the families of the victims have since filed a class action lawsuit against the administration demanding a full accounting, Id say this deserves more than the neat wrap up it received.

    Moreover, when one considers that more effort and time was spent investigating Clinton's sexual improprieties, I shoudl think the public would be a bit more intent on investigating such a atrocious assault on our nation and on the international community.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Clandestine,

    Did you bother to read the rather detailed and exact analysis provided by the Engineering firm that designed the World Trade Center? It was widely published not long after the attack, I think it was Time magazine where I saw it.

    Do you have an Engineering degree? How about detailed knowledge of the construction of the WTC? How about knowledge of how to take a building down (demolition) or how explosives and incendiaries work? How about target analysis?

    I don't have an Engineering degree, and I have only the passing knowledge of a native NYer of the construction of the WTC...but I do have expertise in the remainder...


    First article...

    Obvious possible reason for an explosion in the Customs House is superheated air trapped in the center portion..away from windows or doors that might let it out. Other possibilities include ignition of dust or other flammables inside in an overcharged atmosphere, again caused by heat.

    Second article...

    The designers of the building warned that collapse was to be expected well before the buildings collapsed. At least one of the Engineers involved was amazed that the towers stood as long as they did. Obviously, the discussion of a fuel tank (although diesel isn't generally explosive) brings up another possible cause for an explosion (but not one that merits any special consideration except in hindsight).

    Third article...

    Having employed "implosions" to drop buildings, I find the unwillingness of the subjects of these articles to lend any weight to the effects of vacuum and superheated air a bit difficult to believe. One method used to drop buildings is to create a "fireball" inside that consumes the oxygen. The resulting overpressure from external air will not only collapse the building, but almost guarantees the building will drop straight down. Small explosions mean nothing. At the temps being generated by the burning fuel, aluminum, plastic, steel, etc...any closed room could have exploded, as well as anything else that had a pressure differential. It seems to me that an awful lot of those quotes (like those attributed to the Engineers involved with construction) are taken out of context to make their point (considering the article I mentioned at the top used those same quotes in a much broader context, not trying to make the quotes fit the scenario that someone is pushing).
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Such speculation is appreciated Greeny, however the larger point that a full scale investigation (to lay to rest all inconsistencies with a cover story that was all too readily dispatched in the face of an event warranting significant investigation) should be conducted without hinderance remains.

    Given that the White House has systematically tried to steer serious questions aside only suggests further that this administration is hiding important truths which the American public, let alone the international community, have a right to know.

    Im surprised that a stickler for accuracy and non-ambiguity such as yourself is constantly ready to dismiss the importance of such a full scale comprehensive investigation whilst championing those who wasted significant public time and resources investigating a blow job in the oval office.

    Guess youd be more consistent if 9/11 had happened on Clinton's watch.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Oklahoma City happened on Clinton's watch, and I feel there was no reason for a more detailed analysis then. The cause of the damage was clearly established, and the same is true of the WTC. Those articles are examples of people either protecting their fiefdom (and likely for a monetary reason) or having an agenda to push, because the speculation is simply not realistically viable. If I can point out the inconsistencies in their statements (and their are far better qualified demolitions people than I), the only point to be accomplished is to slow everything down.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The Oklahoma bombing received more detailed investigation than the WTC attacks. Given the fact that they tried to pin Oklahoma on foreign terrorists until the investigations proved otherwise only lends further credence to those who insist that the 3000 victims of 9/11 deserve considerably more than the all too convenient shite the media spoon fed the public.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Clandestine
    The Oklahoma bombing received more detailed investigation than the WTC attacks. Given the fact that they tried to pin Oklahoma on foreign terrorists until the investigations proved otherwise only lends further credence to those who insist that the 3000 victims of 9/11 deserve considerably more than the all too convenient shite the media spoon fed the public.

    Only if you believe that such conspiracies are possible. :rolleyes:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Knowing the political beast as I do from firsthand experience, there is much that is possible and given technology, with far fewer "in the know" than you seem to believe.

    Neverthless, I think its obvious that we shall perpetually disagree and shall never concede our positions.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Greenhat


    Only if you believe that such conspiracies are possible. :rolleyes:

    It was actually all smoke and mirrors, with creative special effects assist by Hollywierd, done at the behest of Bush, within his plot to increase his oil shares. The WTC is still standing... I mean, have you actually visited the supposed spot?

    Then again, it could be that the WTC towers never even were! They were most likely another of the media events staged like the moon walks! :rolleyes:
    Originally posted by Clandestine
    Knowing the political beast as I do from firsthand experience, there is much that is possible and given technology, with far fewer "in the know" than you seem to believe.

    Is this the prelude to the clandestine-collaborator coming clean and confessing - finally - that HE was the chief conspirator, and claiming his credit, formally? Since he has "first hand experience"...? :lol:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Youre as delusional as ever Thanatos, but certainly amusing! :lol:
Sign In or Register to comment.