| Jul 15 @ 9:27 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
lacyvsq
Posts: 4,304
|
The 2002 NIE was forged?
Listen to Kucinch's one article presented last Thursday. The president had knowledge that the NIE as presented to Congress misrepresented the facts.
|
|
  |
|
| Jul 15 @ 9:28 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
Gman762
Posts: 3,291
|
I think it is not out of the realm of possibility.
Unbelievable... 
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 9:30 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
Novalite
Posts: 3,093
|
Lacy Nothing says you have to post on a thread you consider 'loony left rant'. You would have a difficult time indicting me for being 'left' based on my voting history or political views. But feel free to ignorantly discount any with views opposed to yours by slapping a label on them.
Siding with loonie left wingers certainly does nothing to reaffirm your political leanings Lacy. I mean, every argument you have put forth here supports wingnuts who are opposed to everything the conservative government of the US is doing.
LacyI think you will have a difficult time finding any Bush-bashing posts by me or anything pushing a liberal agenda -- even if I do support undocumented immigrants. I think there are a lot of unanswered questions when it comes to 911 and 'laws' put in place as a result. Our government has a huge track record for cover-up. Our nation was built on a representative republican form of government -- where the government answers to the people.
A lot of unanswered questions or a lot of unanswered conspiracy theories? I think the latter.
LacyContinuity of Operation should not be license for assault against America, but should only be used as a defense for America. A dictatorship is not compatible with that concept. Leadership is. Leaders have willing followers. Dictators have slave compliance.
I agree and obviously, so does bush as nothing has been done to make a dictatorship.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 9:34 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
vinnytmd
Posts: 6,004
|
Listen to Kucinch's one article presented last Thursday. The president had knowledge that the NIE as presented to Congress misrepresented the facts
Why?
No one takes him seriously except the troofers. Not even his own Party.
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 9:43 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
lacyvsq
Posts: 4,304
|
...the conservative government of the US is doing.
There is absolutely nothing conservative about the neo-con government. It bears no resemblance to the conservatism of the National Review style of a few decades ago -- to which i whole-heartedly subscribed.
I stated near the beginning of this thread that there is no question but that there was a conspiracy to accomplish the devastation of 911. The only question is who were the conspirators? You want to believe that the conspiracy theory supporting radical Muslims is the truth. I question that theory. There are too many holes in it.
Dang Vinny! I thought you had said your goodbyes and were gone. I wanted Nova to listen to the video. He wants to debate whether Bush misrepresented the Iraqi threat.
[Edited on 7/15/2008 9:47 PM]
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 9:47 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 4,134
|
There are so many misstatements in Nova's arguments it's hard to know where to begin. The Congress did NOT have the same information available the President had. It may surprise you to learn that many members of Congress do not have Top Secret clearance for intelligence information. Many of them were not privy to the contents of the classified version of the 2002 NIE on Iraq, but relied on Tenet's testimony, which he later admitted was influenced by pressure from the White House. The declassified version made available to members of Congress without security clearances, as well as the public, wasn't worth the paper it was printed on, and the chief authors have acknowledged that it was more fabrication than fact. How anyone can bring it up and point to it as justification for anything is beyond me. If anything, information later declassified from the original document and presented to the Congress investigating the run-up to war, and testimony from more witnesses than I care to name, all bolster the case against Shrub, starkly illustrating to what lengths the administration would lie, cover up dissension, and promote conjecture as fact in it's attempts to not find the truth, but "sell" the idea of the war to the American public.
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 9:51 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
vinnytmd
Posts: 6,004
|
I stated near the beginning of this thread that there is no question but that there was a conspiracy to accomplish the devastation of 911. The only question is who were the conspirators?
Easy.
Osama Bin Laden
Mohammed Atta
Abdulaziz al-Omari
Wail al-Shehri
Satam al-Suqami
Here are the other conspirators in case you missed it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizers_of_the_September_11,_2001_attacks
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 9:57 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
lacyvsq
Posts: 4,304
|
That's priceless! You are going to discount Democracy Now when it cites Bugliosi's credentials and you discount youtube...and rely on Wiki! 
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 9:57 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
onoudn
Posts: 4,266
|
Ok I have a question that's a bid off topic to the current flow of discussion.
If Bush thought that Iraq ,aka evil-doing terrorist, was such a threat why didn't he take terrorism more seriously before 9-11 ?
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 9:59 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
Novalite
Posts: 3,093
|
NO There are so many misstatements in Nova's arguments it's hard to know where to begin. The Congress did NOT have the same information available the President had. It may surprise you to learn that many members of Congress do not have Top Secret clearance for intelligence information. Many of them were not privy to the contents of the classified version of the 2002 NIE on Iraq, but relied on Tenet's testimony, which he later admitted was influenced by pressure from the White House.
In short, they had the same information. Tenet can wiggle all he wants now but at the time, he verified the NIE and he attested that it was the best int available. Now that we all know he didn't do his job, he can dance all he wants but it's meaningless. he was wrong and passed on the errant information.
NOthe chief authors have acknowledged that it was more fabrication than fact.
They can say whatever they wish now, the document was made by them and verified by the head of the CIA as the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Of course, as soon as they were found out to be wrong, they can all run around and say whatever they wish. They made it and said it was what it was at the time.
If you don't believe that the President should make decisions based on official documents and testimony then what on earth should he be making them on?
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:00 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 4,134
|
Those the same conspirators that died in the attacks, at least seven of whom were later discovered to be still among the living? Two people reported that three men had taken over United flight 93. At least two people reported six people had taken over the plane that struck the Pentagon. Of those nine, most were only identified by someone on the planes by seat numbers. The fact is that any conjecture about who the conspirators were aboard the planes is just that, conjecture. There is little forensic evidence except in the case of the Pentagon crash that any of those men were actually aboard the planes, and the forensic evidence in the Pentagon crash only verifies that 4 individuals could be identified from DNA as having been on the plane. One doesn't have to be a "troofer" to see the government has failed miserably, in a monumentally inept investigation, to determine who was actually responsible.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:03 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 4,134
|
If you don't believe that the President should make decisions based on official documents and testimony then what on earth should he be making them on? The administration pressured the contents of those "official documents"!!! Shrub, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice made decisions about what would be in those documents, not about what the truth was. They had been told that the information they wanted included was suspect. You're back to circular reasoning. "The president believed the documents that contained the information he said they could contain." I suppose it would have been far too much to ask that he actually have made his decisions based on the verifiable truth.
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:04 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
lacyvsq
Posts: 4,304
|
Check out the Venice Flying Circus videos on the second page of this thread for all the governmental connections of a number of those conspirators.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:05 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
vinnytmd
Posts: 6,004
|
At least two people reported six people had taken over the plane that struck the Pentagon
So you agree a plane hit the Pentagon.
Passed the litmus test.
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:10 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
Novalite
Posts: 3,093
|
NO Those the same conspirators that died in the attacks, at least seven of whom were later discovered to be still among the living?
Details of hijacking suspects released
Sept 28, 2001(CNN) -- The following is a list of the 19 men identified by U.S. investigators as the suspected hijackers aboard the four airliners that crashed September 11, 2001, into the World Trade Center in New York, the Pentagon, and Stony Creek Township, Pennsylvania.
Authorities noted that the names used by the suspects may have been stolen identities.
NOThe administration pressured the contents of those "official documents"!!! Shrub, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice made decisions about what would be in those documents, not about what the truth was. They had been told that the information they wanted included was suspect. You're back to circular reasoning. "The president believed the documents that contained the information he said they could contain." I suppose it would have been far too much to ask that he actually have made his decisions based on the verifiable truth.
Surer Nightowl. And then we have Tenet scrambling to make up a bogus document that took years to make and research. And even after, he swears it's true.
Pretty good for a guy getting called in and told to make up a bogus docu on the spot don't you think?
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:13 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
onoudn
Posts: 4,266
|
Dude did you know you looked a hell of a lot like Mr. "T" ?
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:16 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
Novalite
Posts: 3,093
|
Ounodn Dude did you know you looked a hell of a lot like Mr. "T" ?
I was looking for a more ..... 'Burgess Meredith' effect.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:19 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
onoudn
Posts: 4,266
|
Rumsfeld caught in a lie on question of WMD's......see Rumsfeld caught in a lie
[Edited on 7/15/2008 10:20 PM]
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:20 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
lacyvsq
Posts: 4,304
|
Part of the letter from Kucinich to Congress:
It is worse than heartbreaking that George W. Bush, as Commander in Chief, caused this country to go to war based on information which was false, and which he knew to be false. The consequences for our troops have been devastating. We have lost 4,116 of our beloved servicemen and women since the war began, with over 30,000 physically wounded and countless others emotionally wounded. The toll on the service persons and their families will be felt throughout their lives.
There can be no greater responsibility of a Commander in Chief than to command based on facts on the ground, and to command in fact and in truth. There can be no greater offense of a Commander in Chief than to misrepresent a cause of war and to send our brave men and women into harm’s way based on those misrepresentations.
There has been a breach of faith between the Commander in Chief and the troops. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 or with Al Qaeda’s role in 9/11. Iraq had neither the intention nor the capability of attacking the United States. Iraq did not have weapons of Mass of Destruction. Yet George W. Bush took our troops to war under all of these false assumptions. Given the profound and irreversible consequences to our troops, if his decision was the result of a mistake, he must be impeached. Since his decision was based on lies, impeachment as a remedy falls short, but represents at least some effort on our part to demonstrate our concern about the sacrifices our troops have made.
If you don't believe that the President should make decisions based on official documents and testimony then what on earth should he be making them on?
The CIA is part of the Executive Branch. The entire Executive Branch are under the direction of the president. He is supposed to surround himself with people who will make him look good -- by doing a good job and giving him reliable information. If his staff was incompetent, then he is incompetent. The jobs of all those who gave him bad information should be terminated -- and the buck stops with the President.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:22 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
Angel54214
Posts: 14,056
|
If Bush thought that Iraq ,aka evil-doing terrorist, was such a threat why didn't he take terrorism more seriously before 9-11 ?
Missile defense was his priority in terrorism of al Qaeda. $11 billion had been spent on counter terrorism which was twice as much that was spent on missile defense in 2000.
|
| |
|
|