Above conspiring to cover-up?

What a stupid list...

ZENSMACK89 said:
The questionable track record in no particular order…

PNAC, . . . Rebuilding America's Defenses, New Pearl Harbor
Click to expand...


These are a single point as far as the truthers seem to be concerned (certainly "Rebuilding America's Defenses" and "New Pearl Harbor" can be combined).

An obvious attempt to visually inflate your list right out of the gate. Very deceitful.

. . .peak oil. . .
Click to expand...


Irrelevant to the point of being completely asinine, not to mentioned extremely debatable.

. . .“Osama’s is nothing but Clinton wagging the dog”. . .
Click to expand...


Others' opinions hardly constitute a "track record" for anyone, except maybe the person stating that opinion.

. . .vacation. . .
Click to expand...


Amazingly irrelevent. Incidentally, you include this word 11 times. Yes, Bush has taken more vacation than any sitting president in the history of the U.S., but... how the hell does this have anything to do with your premise that the Bush administration is in fact capable of trying to cover up something like 9/11?


. . .captured by China spy plane. . .
Click to expand...


...what the hell?

. . .“Fool me once”. . . “I’m the decider”...
Click to expand...


I can't believe that you'd actually include Bush's apparent stupidity in a "track record" attempting to "prove" that the Bush administration is willing to (but not capable of?) covering up 9/11.

That's friggin' amazing.


. . .Bin Laden Family allowed to fly. . .
Click to expand...


This happened well after the no-fly ban was lifted, as I understand it.


. . .Constitution “just a goddamned piece of paper”. . .
Click to expand...


Wasn't this just a single report that was never corroborated? Great evidence you've got going. Definitely fits in with the majority of the rest of it. Wow...
 
Zensmack,

Given that we know for a fact that the FDR(and subsequent Truman) administrations perpetrated two of the greatest conspiracy hoaxes in history (keeping FDRs crippling illness from the public and The Manhattan Project), how can we believe their version of the outcome of WWII?

Hitler must still be alive and in control of Europe by your logic. I mean, it's proven that they lied to us, ergo they lied about the outcome of WWII, and all of those kids died in vain, while Adolf is still running things.

Ah, but we know that Hitler was beaten and deposed? We know it a lot better after sixty years of examination and compilation of documents and evidence, naturally... but we do know it, don't we?

Not from a commission! There were many Senate and House discussions and hearings on different aspects of WWII. But not one of them was convened in order to "Write a History of WWII". Historians take care of that. The 911 Commission was the first official attempt at looking into the events that allowed 911 to occur. And as such, they were, roughly speaking, a "first draft of history".... Not a first draft of a second hearing on report.... but a eupemism for the fact that the digging into of reports, records, transcripts, personal correspondence, etc... would continue for years, as it always does with world-changing events.

You see, you totally misunderstand how history is written. We're still getting new understandings today of wars and events that took place hundreds of years ago. History will continue to be rewritten as long as there are historians willing to do the work. (Take a look in the History threads.... there's a great exchange of fact and opinion on the War of 1812.)
 
Cl1mh4224rd said:
What a stupid list...
Click to expand...

Well you know what they say... It takes one to know...

Oh never mind.

Cl1mh4224rd said:
These are a single point as far as the truthers seem to be concerned (certainly "Rebuilding America's Defenses" and "New Pearl Harbor" can be combined).
Click to expand...

Well then I guess all I need to list was the PNAC. Anyway I’m glad you got the reference.

Cl1mh4224rd said:
An obvious attempt to visually inflate your list right out of the gate. Very deceitful.
Click to expand...

Curses! Foiled again!

Cl1mh4224rd said:
Irrelevant to the point of being completely asinine, not to mentioned extremely debatable.
Click to expand...

What's the point. Are you sure you understand?

Cl1mh4224rd said:
Others' opinions hardly constitute a "track record" for anyone, except maybe the person stating that opinion.
Click to expand...

Right but their actions do. Especially when those actions are lies.

Cl1mh4224rd said:
Amazingly irrelevent. Incidentally, you include this word 11 times. Yes, Bush has taken more vacation than any sitting president in the history of the U.S., but... how the hell does this have anything to do with your premise that the Bush administration is in fact capable of trying to cover up something like 9/11?
Click to expand...

That's my favorite part. If he can take them multiple times I can list them. Though I doubt I listed enough to cover them all. I should have listed at least one mental vaction. One big long 8 year mental vacation. BTW where was Dubya leading up to 9/11?

Cl1mh4224rd said:
...what the hell?
Click to expand...

Did you forget that one? Here you go...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/1255343.stm


Cl1mh4224rd said:
I can't believe that you'd actually include Bush's apparent stupidity in a "track record" attempting to "prove" that the Bush administration is willing to (but not capable of?) covering up 9/11.

That's friggin' amazing.
Click to expand...

Stupid but honest huh? Now that's friggin amazing. Using his stupidity to endorse his version is beyond friggin amazing.

Cl1mh4224rd said:
This happened well after the no-fly ban was lifted, as I understand it.
Click to expand...

No not really. Private planes were still grounded but not for them. Also it's recently come out under the Freedom of Information Act in some FBI documents that Osama might have chartered some of those flights himself. How nice and accommodating of Dubya. But then again poor dumb Dubya doesn’t know any better right?

http://www.judicialwatch.org/printer_6322.shtml

Cl1mh4224rd said:
Wasn't this just a single report that was never corroborated? Great evidence you've got going. Definitely fits in with the majority of the rest of it. Wow...
Click to expand...

The Patriot Act is enough proof of that one.
 
This is in the Top 10 List For Most Stupid But Seriously Meant OP Ever. It definitely has a chance for first or second placing.
 
Foolmewunz said:
Zensmack,

Given that we know for a fact that the FDR(and subsequent Truman) administrations perpetrated two of the greatest conspiracy hoaxes in history (keeping FDRs crippling illness from the public and The Manhattan Project), how can we believe their version of the outcome of WWII?

Hitler must still be alive and in control of Europe by your logic. I mean, it's proven that they lied to us, ergo they lied about the outcome of WWII, and all of those kids died in vain, while Adolf is still running things.

Ah, but we know that Hitler was beaten and deposed? We know it a lot better after sixty years of examination and compilation of documents and evidence, naturally... but we do know it, don't we?

Not from a commission! There were many Senate and House discussions and hearings on different aspects of WWII. But not one of them was convened in order to "Write a History of WWII". Historians take care of that. The 911 Commission was the first official attempt at looking into the events that allowed 911 to occur. And as such, they were, roughly speaking, a "first draft of history".... Not a first draft of a second hearing on report.... but a eupemism for the fact that the digging into of reports, records, transcripts, personal correspondence, etc... would continue for years, as it always does with world-changing events.

You see, you totally misunderstand how history is written. We're still getting new understandings today of wars and events that took place hundreds of years ago. History will continue to be rewritten as long as there are historians willing to do the work. (Take a look in the History threads.... there's a great exchange of fact and opinion on the War of 1812.)
Click to expand...
The History of WWII isn't exclusively the US version. The 9/11 commission report is the equivalent of letting The NAZI's after WWII conduct an investigation into the Holocaust.

Then if anyone complains offer up "who would know it better then the NAZI's?"
 
Par said:
This is the second time that I’ve had to ask you not to be childish. You committed a number of fallacies and getting upset with me isn’t going to change that; I’m just the messenger. It’s thoroughly irrational to become angry with people simply because they tell you things that you don’t wish to hear, yet you do so time and again.
Click to expand...
Who's upset?
 
DGM said:
You know your right. Let's go back to the airport security we had before 9/11. It's all unnecessary right. All false flag in order to inconvenience us or hide some other story.
Should we still take our shoes off or was Reid a false flag also?

As far as believing the story, I don't need the government to tell me no explosives were used at the WTC site. I know 3 people that were there involved in the clean-up that can vouch for that. I see and evaluate the evidence myself, so far the "truthers" smoking guns are shooting blanks.
Click to expand...
Maybe there were liquid explosives like the Government believes in.

THAT'S IT!

It was the coffee.
 
ZENSMACK89 said:
You would think if it was so stupid some of you could come up with an answer.
Click to expand...


Had you asked a clear, rational question, you would have gotten an answer.

As it was, your OP is neither recognisable as rational nor as any sort of genuine question.

Thus my answer that you quoted. You will simply have to be satisfied with the answer I already gave; it was a very serious answer and already gave your OP far more consideration than it deserved.
 
ZENSMACK89 said:
The History of WWII isn't exclusively the US version. The 9/11 commission report is the equivalent of letting The NAZI's after WWII conduct an investigation into the Holocaust.

Then if anyone complains offer up "who would know it better then the NAZI's?"
Click to expand...
How does that compare to 9/11. Al qaeda did not do the investigation.
 
ZENSMACK89 said:
Yes and I can find all the same kind of people, agencies, etc. etc. who disagree.

Now given the track record of this administration why do you fall down on their side on a debated topic?
Click to expand...
Well first of all a peer review article has no bias from the Bush administration. The way it typically works is that a peer review article has the author's name removed from the paper. Afterwards other people study the paper and judge it on it's merits. Can you show me a peer review paper that basically helps your claim?
 
Last edited:
Better let Zen rant all he want until he finds himelf alone in his own thread, he doesn't want a discussion anyway.
 
I guess we could ask ZEN why he continues to argue for a new investigation when those that originated the idea have been shown to be incorrect on numerous topics and engage in questionable activities...
 
technoextreme said:
Well first of all a peer review article has no bias from the Bush administration. The way it typically works is that a peer review article has the author's name removed from the paper. Afterwards other people study the paper and judge it on it's merits. Can you show me a peer review paper that basically helps your claim?
Click to expand...
The 9/11 commission report was peer reviewed AND they removed the names of the commissioners?

Wow. You learn something new everyday. Tell me more you've got me fascinated now.
 
Par said:
Seemingly, you’re no longer interested in legitimate discourse and would rather make sneering and posturing remarks at those who either highlight your mistakes or simply don’t agree with you. Thus, I suppose I should bow out. If you have a change of heart, however, let me know.
Click to expand...
Oh come on don't cry. Don't be like that. I still care for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom