Iraq and 9/11

Let's put this all in perspective about Iraq and 9/11.
Click to expand...

Yes let’s do that

Iraq had nothing to do with 911.

Iraq was not invaded because of 911.

No Iraqis were involved in the attacks of 911

Iraq did not support Al Quada.

The decision to invade Iraq was taken because it was believed they were developing WMD.

This was later found to be incorrect.

3000 coalition service people have lost their lives since the start of the war inside Iraq

Countless thousand of innocent Iraqis have lost their lives.

The war has cost the US countless billions of dollars.

This war is the most unpopular war ever.

This war is the one foreign issue that will remove Bush from office.

This removal will have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the claims made by the truth movement.

That being the Iraq war is part of a massive conspiracy brought about by the attacks of 911.

This is because the Iraq war and the attacks of 911 although both dreadful are separate issues.

I trust this clears up Iraq and 911.
 
Agreed with pretty much everything except...

This war is the one foreign issue that will remove Bush from office.
Click to expand...
I think term limits wil remove him from office.
 
Skibum said:
Agreed with pretty much everything except...


I think term limits wil remove him from office.
Click to expand...
Apparently you haven't heard Skibum. Back in '97 (or '00... or '86... I can't remember which) when the NWO was making it's plan to invade Iraq for the second time (the 1st invasion was intentionally left incomplete for just this reason), they were also working on a plan to convince the American public to get rid of that pesky "term-limit" thing. The final touches were put in place about 2 months ago (or 4 months ago... or last year... I can't remember which).

According to my soucre, the plan involves spinach and a massive recall on Tickle Me Elmo dolls. We already saw the spinach thing here. Look for the recall to hit conspicuously right after the holiday season. The plan is to purposefully give the Dems power in next weeks election and then blame the newly elected Democratic congress for the dolls defect (it explodes after three tickles). They will then ride this wave of Democratic incompetence to revise the constitution. It will be amended with plenty of time for Bush to start campaigning for his future as Lifetime Ruler Of the United Empire of America And Beyond (Including Botswana).

... It's true.
 
Iraq was not invaded because of 911.

This war is the one foreign issue that will remove Bush from office.




Just have to quibble a bit with these two. I would argue that 9/11 gave Bush the political capital to be able to engage in war. He frequently mentioned Hussein as a supporter of terrorists and presented many supposed links between Al-Quaeda and Iraq (along the lines of "Bin Laden's cousin's friend's proctologist once watched an Iraq soccer game). It worked for a while, much like the British public before WWI, America had been whipped ito a frenzy by the event. Combine this with an aggressive, UN-unfriendly, alliance unfriendly, "USA is God's chosen", "we will bomb these little brown people into democracy" type crowd (notice I didn't say neo-con, that shows willpower)and you get either a stunning series of victories (Hitler, post-Reichstag fire, gains total control of his nation and turns it into a superpower) or disasters (Bush, bumbles through everything, Aghanistan a growing mess, Iraq a growing mess, your economy an impending mess). No conspiracy needed, just the usual political opportunism.


I sure wish you would remove Bush. Not gonna happen. The best that we can look forward to is a lame duck president is your midterm elections make sense.
 
milesalpha said:
Iraq was not invaded because of 911.

This war is the one foreign issue that will remove Bush from office.

Just have to quibble a bit with these two. I would argue that 9/11 gave Bush the political capital to be able to engage in war. He frequently mentioned Hussein as a supporter of terrorists and presented many supposed links between Al-Quaeda and Iraq (along the lines of "Bin Laden's cousin's friend's proctologist once watched an Iraq soccer game). It worked for a while, much like the British public before WWI, America had been whipped ito a frenzy by the event. Combine this with an aggressive, UN-unfriendly, alliance unfriendly, "USA is God's chosen", "we will bomb these little brown people into democracy" type crowd (notice I didn't say neo-con, that shows willpower)and you get either a stunning series of victories (Hitler, post-Reichstag fire, gains total control of his nation and turns it into a superpower) or disasters (Bush, bumbles through everything, Aghanistan a growing mess, Iraq a growing mess, your economy an impending mess). No conspiracy needed, just the usual political opportunism.


I sure wish you would remove Bush. Not gonna happen. The best that we can look forward to is a lame duck president is your midterm elections make sense.
Click to expand...

I agree totally with what you have said and have bolded what I should have said. Although not directly involved in the attacks of 911, it was used to muscle up support for the invasion.

My bad, apologies.

ETA I would like to add,that although I disagree with war, I disagree from a political view only. I am not anti military nor do I wish to be seen as having a go at any service personnel who may be involved in this war. I fully support our troops and hope this situation can be resolved and they all return home safely
 
Last edited:
Pardalis said:
Shouldn't this thread be moved to the politics forum?
Click to expand...

I don´t think so. It´s part of the CT´ists claims. So it´s more
an CT issue then a political. Even if it´s unpopular.

Eta: Debunking everything or nothing.
 
Last edited:
gumboot said:
They were not. The NORAD exercise had not even started when the first hijacking call was reported. In addition, it was ATC who failed to identify the hijacked aircraft on their scopes, and ATC were not involved in the NORAD exercise.

There were numerous false reports of hijackings (NEADS received 11 hijacking reports in the first 90 minutes), however these were not due to "false blips".

-Gumboot
Click to expand...


No?? So you're saying you never even read the story you support?? I'd have to drag the book out and find the exact page number for you. However in the 9/11 Commission Report they do mention false radar blips and them being purged from all radar screens. That I stand by cause I read the report. And here I thought you'd at least know the story you support. So who's lying?? The Commission or NORAD??
 
Usual Suspect said:
There you go. I actually have the book itself. I guess it was silly of me to think those who believe and support the story would have at least read it and know what the story is. Anyway, that pretty much shows how good the debate is here. Rail Russ and Jess for their "facts" while not knowing any of our own. Bye.
Click to expand...

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? How does my providing of the online version of the report, so you can cite the specific page in your discussion with gumboot, translate into what you stated above?
 
Arkan_Wolfshade said:
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? How does my providing of the online version of the report, so you can cite the specific page in your discussion with gumboot, translate into what you stated above?
Click to expand...


When US said "Anyway, that pretty much shows how good the debate is here." he was seemingly talking about himself.
 
Last edited:
Too bad. I was eager to see Usual Suspect's crack research in action. Well, at least we know he owns a book.
 
Usual Suspect said:
No?? So you're saying you never even read the story you support?? I'd have to drag the book out and find the exact page number for you. However in the 9/11 Commission Report they do mention false radar blips and them being purged from all radar screens. That I stand by cause I read the report. And here I thought you'd at least know the story you support. So who's lying?? The Commission or NORAD??
Click to expand...



I do not support a "Story". I am only interesting in knowing the truth. I'll leave the stories to you. NORAD's exercise was scheduled to commence at 0900hrs EDT. The first hijacking notification occured at 0837 EDT, and the exercise was promptly cancelled.

Please do cite the place in the commission report where false radar blips are mentioned. I would appreciate it if you would precisely quote the passage in question.

I have just brushed up on the report by reading the entire section "Improvising a National Defence" and there is no mention of false radar blips in this section.

-Gumboot
 
gumboot said:
I do not support a "Story". I am only interesting in knowing the truth. I'll leave the stories to you. NORAD's exercise was scheduled to commence at 0900hrs EDT. The first hijacking notification occured at 0837 EDT, and the exercise was promptly cancelled.

Please do cite the place in the commission report where false radar blips are mentioned. I would appreciate it if you would precisely quote the passage in question.

I have just brushed up on the report by reading the entire section "Improvising a National Defence" and there is no mention of false radar blips in this section.

-Gumboot
Click to expand...
I didn't remember this being in the report, so I searched the PDF for "inject," "blip," "screen," and checked all occurrences of "radar," and did not come up with the information Unusual Subject insists is there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom