9/11: The Feds did it.

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 12 2004 @ 10:09 AM
link   
You don't know me so don't make that claim and it is racist and arrogant...right up until you need news feed of bomboings like with Shock & Awe. Then, Al-Jazeerah is a darling.


Please, we have been through that before. You can't convince me that you are not a racist.

I never needed Al-Jazeraa before, nor do I need it now. The only good thing that is has ever done is to give us targets.




posted on Apr, 12 2004 @ 10:15 AM
link   
And you have totally convinced me that you are annoying. But, if you want to discuss world media please make a new thread---we're straying off of 9-11 here.



posted on Apr, 12 2004 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Colonel
And you have totally convinced me that you are annoying. But, if you want to discuss world media please make a new thread---we're straying off of 9-11 here.


I have always noticed that you do that when you start to loose an arguement. As long as you are winning it does not matter where the discussion leads, but as soon as you start to loose it is time to get back to the topic.

Fair enough, the feds did not do it. It was a terrorirst act that was allowed to happen by the American public. Yes, in my opinion, the public is to blame. If they weren't so whiney about security measure being too inconvienent this never would have happened. Too bad it took an event like that to show the need for all of those security measures.



posted on Apr, 12 2004 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by COOL HAND
I have always noticed that you do that when you start to loose an arguement. As long as you are winning it does not matter where the discussion leads, but as soon as you start to loose it is time to get back to the topic.

Fair enough, the feds did not do it. It was a terrorirst act that was allowed to happen by the American public. Yes, in my opinion, the public is to blame. If they weren't so whiney about security measure being too inconvienent this never would have happened. Too bad it took an event like that to show the need for all of those security measures.



I don't lose topics. I just suggested you strt a new thread for this subtopic that we're discussing and we can continue there. No, the Feds didn't "actually" do it but, this adminsitration was aware of trouble brewing---and not vaguely----and allowed it to happen.



posted on Apr, 12 2004 @ 10:23 AM
link   
Colonel, you skirt the truth. Cool hand is not just talking about world media, he is attacking your so called news sources for your own delusional 9-11 theories.

Cool hand is merely trying to point out that your "facts" that you post are merely the bullsh*t that these Arab news sources are feeding you.

Here is a good article from Wall Street Journal that discusses how biased Al Al-Jazeera really is.



posted on Apr, 12 2004 @ 10:28 AM
link   
I don't lose topics. I just suggested you strt a new thread for this subtopic that we're discussing and we can continue there. No, the Feds didn't "actually" do it but, this adminsitration was aware of trouble brewing---and not vaguely----and allowed it to happen.

Have you acutally seen the briefings that they were given? They were rather vague. If we were to to take action on them then we would have shut down ever airport and every place where there was potential of mass causalties. Could you imagine the kind of public outrage that would have cost? We would have had people screaming for doing too much.

Face it, there was nothing that the goverment could have done that would not have polarized the nation. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.



posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Colonel

Yeah, he got a blind cleric---the spiritual leader of those terrorists. Just like the Iraelis took o ut that other cleric who was the spiritual leader of Hamas! You're such a moron. Who did Bush get? Did he get anybody? Have the perpetrators been brought to justice?

HAMBURG, Germany (CNN) -- The only suspect convicted in the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States has been released from a German jail, pending a retrial.

www.cnn.com...

WHERE ARE THE REST OF THE SUSPECTS! WHERE'S OSAMA!

Im the moron? Look in the mirror, mental midget. Who did Bush get? Lets seehow about the mastermind behind 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohamed? How about the sleeper cell called the Buffalo Six? How about all the Al Quida operatives languishing in prison in Gitmo? How about the biggest mass murderer of all, So-Damn InsaneAnd oh, by the way, you answered your own stupid question about the guy in Germanywho released him? The Germans, you freaking idiot, not GWB. You sure have a way of twisting your lies into something you think resembles the truth. Fortunately, as evidenced by most of the recent posts, others are calling you to task on it. God, its just too easy with a moron like you. And oh, BTW, Osama will get his


I see you and Clinton are buddies being that youknow somuch about him and his reasons for doing #. You are such a backwater fool.


You see how the repugnant operates. ANY attempt to stop terrorism is a weak attempt if done by Clinton---even if it succeeds. Yet, this president has brought "none to justice" and claims that he's the war president like he's in some damn movie and being the backwater dunce that you are, you fall for it.

Backwater fooltheres another colorful name from the Kernal. Do I detect another hint of your not so well disguised racism in that comment? Of course, everybody ELSE is racist, but not YOU, right? Of course, the little remark is just window dressing to draw attention away from the fact that you dont know your (sic) butt from a hole in the groundI call your attention to the above, you racist prick...

And dont tell me Im lying about this, dinkus, because I WAS THERE! During the Clinton years, so much money and resources was diverted from intelligence gathering efforts, that we lost what the CIA estimates to be over 90% of our HUMINT resources. Billary wanted to go all satalite. [i/]

Whatever.


Nice answer...must have taken you all night to come up with that one, eh? Did Mommy help you?


Colonel: That's right, liar. Don't give the president credit when his people stop a MAJOR attack on our soil but blame him when an attack does occur but on someone else's watch---namely a lazy repugnant. So, can you tell jme why Clinton freely gave his documents on his efforts against terrorism to trhe Commission and Bush is trying to hide it---AS HE ALWAYS DOES, "SMART GUY?"

OHMYGOD!!! Did you actually mean to write this? Is someone else using your handle? This is one of the most moronic things you have written in a long time! blame him when an attack does occur This is EXACTLY what you are doing to GWB, you dinkus!!! Oh my GOD, you make me laugh!!! Clinton spent eight years destroying the intelligence gathering capability of this nation, screwed the CIA after the Pinochet fiasco, which made it ILLEGAL for them to share information with the FBI. But after all that, after Clinton sat on his azz and didnt take Bin Ladin when he was offered up to him SEVERAL times on a silver platter, you have the audacity to place all the blame for 9/11 on GMB after only eight months in office!! Holy Shiite, Batman, Kernal is retarded!!! And, oh, BTW, LIE!!! Clinton hasnt give a SINGLE daily briefing to the commission. Not one!!! Bush has broken standard procedure and made one available to the public, as well as allowing his National Security Advisor to testify under oath, the FIRST time that has ever been allowed under ANY President. Clinton had too many skeletons (read, interns) in his closet to allow thatbut I can understand why you love Billary so much. You are both liars of extraordinary gall. Too bad you are so freakin BAD at it!!!!

And youll have to explain why you posted the bit where Dr. Rice shuts Bob Kerry down (AGAIN!! HA!!) It shows what an azz he is, and how she had his number.

[Edited on 11-4-2004 by Colonel]

[Edited on 11-4-2004 by Colonel]



posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Colonel
And can you explain this?

Pre-9/11 Secret Briefing Said That Qaeda Was Active in U.S.
By DOUGLAS JEHLand DAVID E. SANGER

WASHINGTON, April 10 The classified briefing that President Bush received 36 days before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks reported that the Al Qaeda terrorist network had maintained an active presence in the United States for years, was suspected of recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York and could be preparing for domestic hijackings.

www.nytimes.com...

I am waiting for you to pass the buck in defense of your God, Bush, as all repugnants do

[Edited on 11-4-2004 by Colonel]



Don't need to pass the buck on anything. You are a moron. Was this supposed to prove something? All it proved was that Bob Kerry was grandstanding for political purposes. He thought he could use an old lawyer tactic of making a speech disguised as a question, then try to limit the witness to a very specific answer, in this case, the title of the PDB. Alone, it is very misleading, and that's exactly what Kerry wanted. He never thought in a million years that GWB would declassify and release it, so he was blown out of the water and shown to be a perfect azz. As far as the article goes, you need to read (if you can) before you post...let me quote from your own link...

"But the briefing did not point to any specific time or place of attack and did not warn that planes could be used as missiles."


Just another case of Demoncraps attempting to lie their way into the White House again.

Wow, you really are pissed that you're a looser, aren't you???



posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 09:10 AM
link   
Dang AR,
You got to dissect the colnuts stuff before the rest of us even got a chance.

Wonder what kind of response you'll get from the col and his grouppies?



posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Affirmative Reaction
How about the biggest mass murderer of all, So-Damn InsaneAnd oh, by the way, you answered your own stupid question about the guy in Germanywho released him? And oh, BTW, Osama will get his

The biggest mass murderer of all is Bush---let's just get that clear now. He loves the kill from looking at his history. Saddam was never a threat and Bush lied to the American people so as to relish in killing even more.

Backwater fooltheres another colorful name from the Kernal. Do I detect another hint of your not so well disguised racism in that comment? Of course, everybody ELSE is racist, but not YOU, right?

The guy calls me a Kentucky Fried but I'm a racist for telling the truth--that you, Rufus, are a backwater, sister-loving, buck-toothed unwashed country moron. ITS NOT MY FAULT. BUT, BACK TO THE PROGRAM.


But after all that, after Clinton sat on his azz and didnt take Bin Ladin when he was offered up to him SEVERAL times on a silver platter, you have the audacity to place all the blame for 9/11 on GMB after only eight months in office!!

Say the lie often enough and people will believe it. Challenge it and it falls apart. Now, why would Clinton turn down Osama? What sense does that make when Al Queda was a major issue with Clinton? Answer me WHY? It doesn't make sense. And don't give me any bull# cornbread response--give me a factual one from a source (and not NewsMax, Faux, or Worldnet Daily). Then, again, why would Bush allow the bin Laden family to escape after 9-11? And I have PROOF of that....

propagandamatrix.com...

And youll have to explain why you posted the bit where Dr. Rice shuts Bob Kerry down (AGAIN!! HA!!) It shows what an azz he is, and how she had his number.

I posted it to put the lie to you saying that Clinton had no plan for the USS Cole. He did and gave it to the present adminsitratoin---which did nothing.



[Edited on 13-4-2004 by Colonel]



posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by COOL HAND
Dang AR,
You got to dissect the colnuts stuff before the rest of us even got a chance.

Wonder what kind of response you'll get from the col and his grouppies?



I guess we'll find out soon enough, eh? Maybe more from TrueLies (very interesting moniker, eh? Self descriptive perhaps?) about "we believers" sticking together and comparing lies....



posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 09:48 AM
link   
See, that's how ya shut 'em down. A repugnant is much like a bully. Stand up to one and they just wilt.

[Edited on 13-4-2004 by Colonel]



posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Colonel

You have stated that al Jazeera is a news source that you believe. Have you ever analyzed their stories with the same eye toward bias that you shine upon CNN, etc. ?

Have you ever watched their political cartoons by Shujaat? Would you call them unbiased? Do you think their polls are scientific?



____________________________



posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 10:01 AM
link   
Listen, I've seen poltical cartoons that lambaste Bush and those that laud Bush and villify the Dems. Its just that...political cartoons. They're editorial. But, if I want to learn about an event that took place, I don't see why AL-Jazzeerah would straight up lie about it---like lie about events that never happened and the like.



posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 10:06 AM
link   
Been saying this since September 12, 2001 Bush knew and was behind it.

The strange collapse of WTC 7
Was there really a steel-melting inferno inside the WTC?
The 1993 WTC bombing was ALLOWED to happen!
Another Anomaly in the Case Against Zacarias Moussaoui
100 million dollars vanished from the WTC before they collapsed.
THE "CONTROLLED" COLLAPSE OF WTC-7
Unanswered Questions about the attack on the WTC
Passengers on United Airlines Flight 93
Passengers on United Airlines Flight 175
911 - THE BASIC QUESTIONS
The FBI shutdown of Arab websites in the days leading up to 9/11
The Complete 9/11 Timeline
911 - THE BASIC QUESTIONS
The five dancing Israelis arrested on 9/11
Bush at Booker Elementary - the video that proves that 9/11 was not a surprise
Bush's lie about seeing the first WTC plane impact
The 9/11 USAF Stand Down
The 9/11 hijackings - an inside job?
7 of the 19 alleged 9/11 hijackers are still alive
The World Trade Center demolition - an analysis
Was there really a steel-melting inferno inside the WTC?
The controlled collapse of WTC 7
The "Arrive onMonday" FEMA tape
All 9/11 airports served by same company
9/11 inside trades lead to CIA
9/11 - what did the government know and when did it know it?
Foreign currency traders helped themselves to over $100 million just before the WTC collapsed!
Another Anomaly in the Case Against Zacarias Moussaoui
Instant Messages To Israel Warned Of WTC Attack
Top Pentagon Officials Cancel Flights On September 10, 2001
Stranger then fiction.
FAKE TERROR - THE ROAD TO WAR AND DICTATORSHIP
Tim Osman
PROTECTING THE TERRORISTS / ALLOWING THEM TO ATTACK



posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 10:07 AM
link   
Thanks, BT, glad you could come up with so many resurces to for some non-believers in the house.



posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 10:13 AM
link   
The biggest mass murderer of all is Bush---let's just get that clear now. He loves the kill from looking at his history. Saddam was never a threat and Bush lied to the American people so as to relish in killing even more.

Tell that to the Kurds

The guy calls me a Kentucky Fried but I'm a racist for telling the truth--that you, Rufus, are a backwater, sister-loving, buck-toothed unwashed country moron. ITS NOT MY FAULT. BUT, BACK TO THE PROGRAM.

No, he called you a racists based on reading many of your posts. Do you read the entire passages before you start responding to them?


Say the lie often enough and people will believe it. Challenge it and it falls apart. Now, why would Clinton turn down Osama? What sense does that make when Al Queda was a major issue with Clinton? Answer me WHY? It doesn't make sense. And don't give me any bull# cornbread response--give me a factual one from a source (and not NewsMax, Faux, or Worldnet Daily). Then, again, why would Bush allow the bin Laden family to escape after 9-11? And I have PROOF of that....

Clinton let them go because he had no idea how much of a threat is was. He was a fool. No one can deny that.


I posted it to put the lie to you saying that Clinton had no plan for the USS Cole. He did and gave it to the present adminsitratoin---which did nothing.

Actually Clinton never had a plan to begin with. Those missiles were launched in retaliation on the basis of recommendations from the JCS. He wanted to let diplomats take care of the issue. Clinton wanted to try them in America for the Cole attack.



posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 10:18 AM
link   
Ok, lets get a census, (Yes) for the feds and bush did it. (No) for the feds and bush didnt do it.


YES

[Edited on 13-4-2004 by SpittinCobra]



posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 10:19 AM
link   
YES



posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by COOL HAND
The biggest mass murderer of all is Bush---let's just get that clear now. He loves the kill from looking at his history. Saddam was never a threat and Bush lied to the American people so as to relish in killing even more.

Tell that to the Kurds

The guy calls me a Kentucky Fried but I'm a racist for telling the truth--that you, Rufus, are a backwater, sister-loving, buck-toothed unwashed country moron. ITS NOT MY FAULT. BUT, BACK TO THE PROGRAM.

No, he called you a racists based on reading many of your posts. Do you read the entire passages before you start responding to them?


Say the lie often enough and people will believe it. Challenge it and it falls apart. Now, why would Clinton turn down Osama? What sense does that make when Al Queda was a major issue with Clinton? Answer me WHY? It doesn't make sense. And don't give me any bull# cornbread response--give me a factual one from a source (and not NewsMax, Faux, or Worldnet Daily). Then, again, why would Bush allow the bin Laden family to escape after 9-11? And I have PROOF of that....

Clinton let them go because he had no idea how much of a threat is was. He was a fool. No one can deny that.


I posted it to put the lie to you saying that Clinton had no plan for the USS Cole. He did and gave it to the present adminsitratoin---which did nothing.

Actually Clinton never had a plan to begin with. Those missiles were launched in retaliation on the basis of recommendations from the JCS. He wanted to let diplomats take care of the issue. Clinton wanted to try them in America for the Cole attack.



In all my experiences in the battle of ideas, why is it repugnants need 10 people to convey one or two thoughts?





top topics
 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join