Are Our Leaders Really Incompetent … Or Just Pretending?

reply to post by JeZeus


No prob mate. Nah, just tired of hearing people try to claim the US military is not as big, or expensive, as it actually is. People trying to play down the massive expensive camouflaged elephant that is the real cause of our economic problems. That and jobs being outsourced.

I'm saying it out of disgust not pride.

reply to post by ANOK

The F-14 first flew in 1970, are you saying the Tomcat is not still one of the top military planes?

Not any more.
The last F14 was taken out of service in October 2006.
I thought it was a cool plane.
Interesting how the B52 is still one our front line bombers and it's from the 50's.

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by maxella1

 

We haven't advanced a single step. So you believe the people in power hijacked those planes and gave their lives in the process (of course not all of them).

So how did that go according to you? Were they drawing straws at the bilderberg meeting deciding who was going to fly those planes and die?

There are passenger lists, who exactly were they?

edit on 24-10-2012 by -PLB- because: (no reason given)

I don't even know why I'm answering this but here you go.

What if the hijackers worked for somebody who had something to do with our government ?

reply to post by maxella1


let me get this straight. You believe the official explanation is how it happened, with the addition that Osama was instructed by the US government? If so, then you have one of the more sane conspiracy theories out there. Of course still no evidence, but at least this is in the realm of possibilities.

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by maxella1

 

let me get this straight. You believe the official explanation is how it happened, with the addition that Osama was instructed by the US government? If so, then you have one of the more sane conspiracy theories out there. Of course still no evidence, but at least this is in the realm of possibilities.

edit on 25-10-2012 by -PLB- because: (no reason given)

I believe that planes were flown into the buildings by somebody. But there's no evidence that they were flown by these people. And I also believe that WTC were destroyed by something in addition to the airplanes and jet fuel.

Is that clear enough for you?

reply to post by maxella1


it is clear to me that you do believe in those impossible conspiracy theories for which you have no evidence. The idea that the hijackers were not Islamic fanatics, but hijackers with other motives is especially far fetched. To get people to murder themselves and a lot of people in the process, and without anyone finding out, requires an extremely high competence level. The unnecessary high risk that is involved makes the idea belonging in the land of fables.

reply to post by -PLB-

it is clear to me that you do believe in those impossible conspiracy theories for which you have no evidence.

No no... You believe in impossible conspiracy theories

The idea that the hijackers were not Islamic fanatics, but hijackers with other motives is especially far fetched.

You created the Idea that I think they were not Islamic fanatics....

Anyway I'm done...

Originally posted by maxella1
No no... You believe in impossible conspiracy theories

Such as?

You created the Idea that I think they were not Islamic fanatics....

Anyway I'm done...

No, you created that idea by saying it was 'someone' and that there is no evidence it were Islamic fanatics. But you can of course come with a straight statement that you do believe it were Islamic fanatics and any other idea is extremely unlikely (like I was saying all along and was basically my point.

reply to post by ANOK


I was in a Navy squadron in the 80s and early 90s. The platform I worked on, is retired. The A-6s we used, are gone. F-14s, gone. F-111s, gone. Six carriers gone, countless subs retired, cruisers, destroyers, retired. The Navy, once had a goal of 600 ships, it never made it there, even in the 80s. The sealift capability, is a joke anymore.

I'm a member of an F-16 squadron now, our youngest jet, is 24 years old. Every one of them, are passed their designed life. There are quite a few parts, that are no longer in stock, we rely on AMARC (the Boneyard) to keep our airplanes flying. F-35s and F-22s, were supposed to start replacing our jets a couple years ago. The Air Force, is going to request special appropriations in 2013,to refit the F-16 fleet to try and keep it flying for another 20 years to make up for cutting the F-22 short and the delays in the F-35. And even then, the F-16s are developing problems that, just can't be repaired.

Are their cuts that can be made? Sure. There are way too many bean counters in the DC area, wasting money better spent on weapons. The money we spend now, is a pittance to what we used to spend. You want to blame the budget issues on something, look at the nanny state we have been building for thirty years.

reply to post by -PLB-

I know I said that I'm done but you keep pushing.

Such as?

Don't you know what you believe in?

No, you created that idea by saying it was 'someone' and that there is no evidence it were Islamic fanatics. But you can of course come with a straight statement that you do believe it were Islamic fanatics and any other idea is extremely unlikely (like I was saying all along and was basically my point.

The people you say flown the planes did not behave like Islamic fanatics according to the coincidence theory that you believe in... Or did they?

they could have been leprechauns as far as we know. Also why does it even matter?

reply to post by vipertech0596


correct. My country: small military, nanny state number uno. We had subsidies so that poor people with no job could buy large LCD tvs. No surprise that we are suffering from a crisis too.

Though I do agree that the wars played a large role in the US budged deficiency.

reply to post by maxella1


As with all flights the passengers and crews of the 4 9/11 fatal flights were documented.

Who do you say took over the flights and crashed them ?

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by maxella1

 

As with all flights the passengers and crews of the 4 9/11 fatal flights were documented.

Who do you say took over the flights and crashed them ?

I don't know..

Do you have documents that these 19 people took over the planes?

reply to post by maxella1

Do you have documents that these 19 people took over the planes?

Phone calls from people on one plane.
That's good enough for me.

Originally posted by maxella1
Don't you know what you believe in?

Yes I do. And I am asking you what theory which I believe in is impossible, and why. Or you can continue playing this game of course. I will play along as long it amuses me.

The people you say flown the planes did not behave like Islamic fanatics according to the coincidence theory that you believe in... Or did they?

Coincidence theory? What is that? Who are we to decide how Islamic fanatics should behave?

they could have been leprechauns as far as we know. Also why does it even matter?

Right... leprechauns. And indeed, what does it matter anyhow who did those attacks

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by maxella1

 

Do you have documents that these 19 people took over the planes?

Phone calls from people on one plane.
That's good enough for me.

Oh Yeah, I forgot about the red bandana..

reply to post by -PLB-

Coincidence theory? What is that?

Wasn't it a Coincidence that FIMA arrived early for a training exercise? and NORAD had training exercises with similar scenarios on 9/11? And wasn't it a Coincidence that Silverstein had a dermatologist appointmemt that morning and missed his usual breakfast at the Windows on the world? Wasn't it a Coincidence that unidentified FBI agent found a passport that belonged to one of the terrorists?

These are just a few of Coincidences from 9/11. There were more i but I don't feel like typing it right now, sorry.

Originally posted by -PLB-
Coincidence theory? What is that? Who are we to decide how Islamic fanatics should behave?

If they were so devout to their religion than why did they do the opposite of what it requires? As in going to strip clubs, using drugs, getting lap dances, etc. The only thing that solidifies that these hijackers were Muslims was the passports that survived the crashed and Atta's bag:

Atta's bags were later recovered in Logan International Airport, and they contained airline uniforms, flight manuals, and other items. The luggage included a copy of Atta's will, written in Arabic, as well as a list of instructions, also in Arabic, such as "make an oath to die and renew your intentions", "you should feel complete tranquility, because the time between you and your marriage in heaven is very short", and "check your weapon before you leave and long before you leave. You must make your knife sharp and you must not discomfort your animal during the slaughter"

Sounds like a devout Muslim looking to be a Martyr. He's devout enough to follow the rules of a less painful sacrifice by sharpening his weapon but happens to do coc aine and pays strippers for lap dances. Do you not see the inconsistencies with these alleged Muslims who were "fanatics"?

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by maxella1

 

As with all flights the passengers and crews of the 4 9/11 fatal flights were documented.

Who do you say took over the flights and crashed them ?

I don't know..

Do you have documents that these 19 people took over the planes?

Why do you ask for documents which are the most improbable things you are likely to find with a murderous conspiracy ?

Have you not considered any of the circumstantial evidence indicating the 19 ? All 19 of middle eastern origin and with no legitimate reason to be in US. Split into 4 teams of 4,4,4 and 3. Links back to the terrorist cell in Hamburg. Links to Afghanistan. Links to each other ( Mohamed Atta of AA 11 on video with Ziad Jarrah of UA 93 ). Voices recorded on ATC tapes clearly indicating that for the the person in contol English was not their first language. Reference to hi-jackers by their specific seats and said to be of middle eastern origin by other passengers in phone calls. Flight training undergone by means of financial remitances from abroad. In the case of UA 93 the cockpit voice recorder shows one hi-jacker calling another by name.

I haven't tried to be exhaustive but perhaps you could indicate to me who, of the known passengers of these flights, were more likely to to be the hi-jackers than those currently identified.

reply to post by Alfie1

Have you not considered any of the circumstantial evidence

Yes I did and it suggests that the hijackers were Middle Eastern, and I'm really excited that you brought up circumstantial evidence because as you know we also have a lot of it that suggests that these terrorists had a lot of help from within our government.

Do you want me to go over the circumstantial evidence with you?

Just for the record I never did and do not now deny the existence of Islamic terrorists or the hijackers.

But I haven't seen any evidence [ that looked real ] that they were these people below