Are Our Leaders Really Incompetent … Or Just Pretending?

Originally posted by maxella1
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.

edit on 25-10-2012 by maxella1 because: (no reason given)

Then I don't understand why you told me above that you didn't know who the hi-jackers were. Do you agree the 19 or do you have better candidates ?

reply to post by Alfie1


Sorry I added something to my post after you replied I guess.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by maxella1
reply to post by Alfie1

 

Sorry I added something to my post after you replied I guess.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Yes, I see that but I am still puzzled. The 19 boarded the 9/11 flights under the names you have shown. Some being caught on cctv in the process. Are you saying that you think 19 unknowns substituted themselves at the last minute ready to die under others names ? and the real 19 vanished from the face of the earth ?

Doesn't sound very credible especially as there has been some dna identification of terrorist remains.

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by maxella1
reply to post by Alfie1

 

Sorry I added something to my post after you replied I guess.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Yes, I see that but I am still puzzled. The 19 boarded the 9/11 flights under the names you have shown. Some being caught on cctv in the process. Are you saying that you think 19 unknowns substituted themselves at the last minute ready to die under others names ? and the real 19 vanished from the face of the earth ?

Doesn't sound very credible especially as there has been some dna identification of terrorist remains.

I'm saying that I see no evidence that links these people to any of the planes involved in the attacks... The CCTV video shows two of them in Portland boarding a plane that was not used in the attack. The passport, bandana the rent a car all appear to be planted ( to me at least). There were one guy that saw his picture on the news (not his name).. a PHOTO of himself after 9/11 and was shocked to see that he is dead. All of them behaved in a way that appears to me like they were leaving a trail on purpose. Their flight school instructors said that they were not very good at all but on 9/11 they flew like pro's.. A women that worked on Able Danger said that Atta on TV looked completely different from the Atta she had contact with prior to 9/11... DNA really ?

Anyway maybe it was them but I personally don't see convincing evidence. If it was these 19 or not doesn't change much as far as I'm concerned.The reality is that we were attacked and our government helped or screwed up one way or another and covered it up.

Originally posted by maxella1

Wasn't it a Coincidence that FIMA arrived early for a training exercise?

Your primary source is Youtube? How does this relate to the conspiracy? Was FEMA part of the conspiracy in your version? Including all its employees?

and NORAD had training exercises with similar scenarios on 9/11?

So you think that the conspirators gave that order for exercises, for what reason exactly? Was NORAD and its employees also part of the conspiracy?

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?

Could be. No idea how often he missed his usual breakfast. Coincidences are bound to happen. It would be suspicious if there were no coincidences. Do you think Larry was part of the conspiracy?

Wasn't it a Coincidence that unidentified FBI agent found a passport that belonged to one of the terrorists?

Maybe I should ask who was not part of your version of the conspiracy. So FBI was too?

See how this is getting totally unlikely real fast if you really think these events were part of a conspiracy?

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.

How did you determine that the amount of coincidences were abnormal? There were such incredibly large amount of parameters, people and organizations involved. So please share your analysis.

reply to post by -PLB-


I really don't have anything else to say to you. And Hopefully now you understand what I meant by coincidence theory.

reply to post by maxella1


yup, made up term based on your gut.

On the other hand, how likely is it that all those organizations and people you named are involved?

Originally posted by vipertech0596
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 was in the Navy from 89-95. EA-6B Prowler squadron. Did you serve in the Gulf?

Still you claimed the planes were 20 years old lol. Yes those planes have been retired, and replaced by the 30 year old F-18. The Navy doesn't need 600 ships.

I still don't get your point though. The US Navy is still more advanced and equipped than any other. Who cares about the air force lol? Do you really want more tax dollars spent on what isn't really needed? Would you cut welfare to buy aircraft? Cut education to buy ships?

I supposed if you truly believe 911 was a terrorist attack, then I guess you buy into the BS that we are under threat lol. The war in the ME is not about terrorism, it's about capitalist interests and keeping the ME from becoming a powerful economic threat. Capitalism is a cut throat system and capitalists will go to any length to maintain control of the market.

Originally posted by samkent
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.

Yeah fair enough. I knew they were being fazed out, but didn't know they had been completely.

They were talking about replacing everything with the F-18 in the early 90's.

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by ANOK

 

I was in the Navy from 89-95. EA-6B Prowler squadron. Did you serve in the Gulf?

Still you claimed the planes were 20 years old lol. Yes those planes have been retired, and replaced by the 30 year old F-18. The Navy doesn't need 600 ships.

I still don't get your point though. The US Navy is still more advanced and equipped than any other. Who cares about the air force lol? Do you really want more tax dollars spent on what isn't really needed? Would you cut welfare to buy aircraft? Cut education to buy ships?

I supposed if you truly believe 911 was a terrorist attack, then I guess you buy into the BS that we are under threat lol. The war in the ME is not about terrorism, it's about capitalist interests and keeping the ME from becoming a powerful economic threat. Capitalism is a cut throat system and capitalists will go to any length to maintain control of the market.

Did I serve in the Gulf? Yep. Our squadron spent a lot of time in the Gulf.

The F-18C/Ds are being replaced by F/A-18E/Fs...which are Hornets in name only. They are longer, bigger wingspan, better engines, better payload.

The US Navy....needs a hell of a lot more ships than 287. The deployments are increasing, the equipment is going longer between maintenance. And if the Marines ever had to perform a forced landing...the best the Navy can do for them anymore are the 5 inch popguns.

The Air Force....now that is funny coming on a 9/11 site....where the majority of the people whine that the military didnt stop the attack. Of course those same people are completely ignorant of the meat cleaver that was taken to the Air Force and Continental Air Defense in the early 1990s.

As for education and welfare, we could cut fifty percent of the money spent on those two programs and NOT affect the end results.....all by taking the Federal Government out of the equation and letting the states handle those issues. Think about it, our schools had much better test scores and performance until Carter created the Department of Education.

See the funny part is, people like you whine and moan and complain about how much money gets spent on the military.......and then are the first ones that scream where was the military..........

Originally posted by vipertech0596
Did I serve in the Gulf? Yep. Our squadron spent a lot of time in the Gulf.

What do yo mean by a 'lot of time'? How long was the Gulf War?

What ship was your squadron attached to? What medals/ribbons did you get?

Just curious mate.

reply to post by ANOK


From about the time we started escorting tankers during the Iran-Iraq war till after Desert Storm ended, detachments of my squadron was there. We rotated in and out. I spent time on the USS Gary, USS Deyo, USS LaSalle and the USS Boone. Buddies on mine were on the Sammy B when her moronic captain tried to back out of a minefield. Most of what we did, will never see history books and that what is in the history books, is credited to more overt units.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by ANOK

 

From about the time we started escorting tankers during the Iran-Iraq war till after Desert Storm ended, detachments of my squadron was there. We rotated in and out. I spent time on the USS Gary, USS Deyo, USS LaSalle and the USS Boone. Buddies on mine were on the Sammy B when her moronic captain tried to back out of a minefield. Most of what we did, will never see history books and that what is in the history books, is credited to more overt units.

You were in a Navy A-6 squadron? I'm a little confused.

Originally posted by vipertech0596

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.

Navy squadrons don't move around like that. They are attached to one carrier for the whole deployment (usually 18 months including work-ups). We were on the Sara for eight months straight during the Gulf War, no rotating in and out. That's not even a Navy term. We don't rotate we deploy.

The USS Gary and the USS Boone are frigates, the USS Deyo is a destroyer. USS LaSalle is a command ship. They don't carry aircraft. If you were in an A-6 squadron you would have been on a carrier.

What was your rating? Being in a squadron means you would have had some kind of aviation rating, why would you be on a frigate? Unless you were in a helo squad, but you said you were in an A-6 Intruder squad, which is an attack aircraft.

Sorry to be picky but what you say makes no sense to me. Maybe you can clear it up? How about telling me what medals we received for our GW service?

reply to post by ANOK


Ah...I see the confusion I caused. No...I mentioned A-6s because they were the workhorse back then and had to be retired because of all the cracks they were finding in the wing attachments....similar to what is going on with F-16s now. Although if you were on the Sara...then we were on the same base. As for rotation/deployment....you should see the guys in my unit today when I use Navy lingo instead of Air Force lingo....

As for the decorations we received there was a MUC, a NUC, Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, Battle E...doesn't really apply, a few of us in my squadron had combat awards for the really stupid sh*t we did and some of us earned small arms ribbons for various reasons.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by ANOK

 

No...I mention A-6s because they were the workhorse back then and had to be retired because of all the cracks they were finding in the wing attachments....similar to what is going on with F-16s now.

No you said this....

Originally posted by vipertech0596

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.

So if you were not in an A-6 squadron then what kind of squadron were you in? Same point applies mate.

Sorry mate but every post you make it clear you are not telling me the truth. You fail to tell me what your rating was, you fail to tell me what medals were issued. Then you change your story.

reply to post by ANOK


Read the edited post.....

Originally posted by vipertech0596

As for the decorations we received there was a MUC, a NUC, Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, Battle E...doesn't really apply, a few of us in my squadron had combat awards for the really stupid sh*t we did and some of us earned small arms ribbons for various reasons.

But none of those are GW medals. Here's my ribbons...



Do you know what medals are GW specific? Why didn't you get any of them, or mention them?

The Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal was not issued for the Gulf War either...

The AFEM has been issued for numerous operations in the Persian Gulf, most notably Operation Earnest Will, which began in 1987 and lasted until the eve of Operation Desert Shield.[4] Following the close of Desert Storm,[5] and the engagement in peacekeeping and sanction missions against Iraq, the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal was issued again for several operations such as Operation Northern Watch, Operation Southern Watch, and Operation Vigilant Sentinel.

en.wikipedia.org...



So why not just tell me what your rating was, and why you deployed to so many non-aviation ships during an eight month deployment? I'm still confused and doubting your claim, sorry.

reply to post by ANOK


Well, seeing how I have already sent you a private message concerning what unit I was with...which was an aviation unit that deployed on small boys, I won't cover that again. No, my fruit salad does not have either of the Kuwaiti Liberation Medals. I spent my time in Kuwait prior to Saddam's remodeling job. My AFESM, was for escorting tankers and other special events. The Southwest Asia, was not issued until Storm/Shield, and I was in other parts of the world. My return to that area...was later.


As for my rate, it was originally Aviation Anti-Submarine Warfare Technician (AX), which merged into Aviation Electronics Technician in....1989..if I remember correctly...one day I was an AX3 the next day an AT3...

Originally posted by maxella1


Anyway maybe it was them but I personally don't see convincing evidence. If it was these 19 or not doesn't change much as far as I'm concerned.The reality is that we were attacked and our government helped or screwed up one way or another and covered it up.

This really puzzles me. You open a thread where you ask if it was incompetence of the government and now you say that you don't care if they were just incompetent er were complicit or even behind it. As if it does not matter. Or are you just saying this because there is only evidence pointing in the direcion of those Arabs and the idea that other people hijacked the planes is indeed a bit crazy?

reply to post by -PLB-


Okay explain to me why does it make any difference to you if the hijackers were Arab or not.. First most of them were Saudi but it didn't matter did it? We went to Afghanistan instead.

Does the fact that they were Middle Eastern means that they could do it without inside help? Are you saying that because they were Islamic terrorists and not the IRA for instance that means that they didnt have assistance from the inside?