Loose Change

[Polaris]

I disagree. I do find it strange a government would kill thousands of it's own people, indiscriminately of their gender, race or religion. I think the Al Qaeda responsability to be a valid theory, because of Al Qaeda's history of behaviour, it's known hatred of anything american, it's indiscriminate acts of pure violence. 9/11 seems to be following exactly that pattern of behaviour. if it indeed was the the governement's doing, it would be unprecedented in history.

I'm going to throw this out there to be devil's advocate (my apologies if somoene else already mentioned this - I only got to the quoted post in my reading of the thread).

The Coventry bombing by the Luftwaffe was allowed to happen by Churchill and Bomber Command. It was allowed to happen because it was believed that opposing the raid would give away the existence of the broken Enigma encryption to the Nazis. So it's not unprecedented - however, circumstances were certainly much different.

 

[Gravy]

Gravy...I'm not clear on why I owe you an apology.

I already told you: for calling me a liar. Prove it or apologize.

 

[Gravy]

Do you realize the 19 hijackers trained right here in america?

GET OUT!!!???

Jeez, I've gotta go rethink this whole 9/11 thing. Everybody, please disregard my previous 500 posts.

 

[Gravy]

Do you remember how bill clinton got caught having an affair with monica lewinsky?

NSA spymaster Linda Tripp.

 

[WildCat]

Do you realize the 19 hijackers trained right here in america? Even several of them had resided in Maryland during training. Two of the hijackers lived with couple of FBI agents in california. Several of them got their training in aviation school in florida, owned by a known criminal with no pilot experience. Few of the hijackers were involved with various terrorist activities prior to sept 11, so how were they allowed into america with VISA that should have been denied?

So, we agree that there were 19 hijackers, and not remote control planes, pods, missiles, an A-3, etc?

Do you think the NSA was spying prior to sept 11? Dick cheney has fought for legislation to spy on "terrorists" without warrent since 1975.

There never was and isn't now a need for a warrant to spy on enemy agents.

Do you remember how bill clinton got caught having an affair with monica lewinsky? So it has been proven countless times the NSA had been spying prior to sept 11...why were there no action taken toward the hijackers?

I have no idea what Bill and Monica have to do w/ this.

Incompetence pretty much covers your last statement, as well as the fact that the NSA and CIA was forbidden by law prior to 9/11 to share info w/ the FBI and other law enforcement agencies.

 

[Gravy]

I'm going to throw this out there to be devil's advocate (my apologies if somoene else already mentioned this - I only got to the quoted post in my reading of the thread).

The Coventry bombing by the Luftwaffe was allowed to happen by Churchill and Bomber Command. It was allowed to happen because it was believed that opposing the raid would give away the existence of the broken Enigma encryption to the Nazis. So it's not unprecedented - however, circumstances were certainly much different.

Yes, there are several examples where similar tragedies were allowed to occur in wartime, to avoid revealing intelligence-gathering methods. I can't think of others offhand, but the book "The Code Breakers" lists 'em.

 

[Polaris]

Xraye, I've gotta say I'm disappointed. You said you were going to read through the entire thread, making notes of what has been covered and where you still felt the CT "evidence" had not been addressed. I recommended that you choose a particular subject and stick with it, discuss it in detail, so that we might have a meaningful discussion. So what did you come up with?

The Reichstag fire. "History repeats itself".

Why would you begin your arguments there? With speculation and conjecture? Is it because you have no facts to argue?

C'mon, surely you can do better that that. geggy can't, but I expected more of you.

Not to mention, the Reichstag fire happened in 1933. It was a (non-lethal) faked attack by communist terrorists so that Hitler could circumvent the democratic institutions of the Weimar. The invasion of Poland didn't occur until September of 1939, 6 years later. And then, another fake attack (one where Polish destruction of bridges was faked to justify the invasion by an armored Nazi force that just happened to be amassed at the border) was committed to justify annexation of Poland (well, the half that Uncle Joe didn't get). The analogy doesn't quite fit. The Reichstag fire wasn't an excuse by Hitler to justify war. It was to justify giving himself totalitarian powers. Bush did no such thing after 9/11, no matter how you spin the Patriot Act.

 

[kookbreaker]

I'm going to throw this out there to be devil's advocate (my apologies if somoene else already mentioned this - I only got to the quoted post in my reading of the thread).

The Coventry bombing by the Luftwaffe was allowed to happen by Churchill and Bomber Command. It was allowed to happen because it was believed that opposing the raid would give away the existence of the broken Enigma encryption to the Nazis. So it's not unprecedented - however, circumstances were certainly much different.

No. No. No.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Coventry

A common myth surrounding the bombing is that Coventry was deliberately sacrificed in order to prevent the Germans knowing that Enigma cipher machine messages were being read by British codebreakers. This has been proven untrue — Winston Churchill was aware that a heavy raid was to take place, but it was not known where, and was expected to be in London.

 

[Polaris]

Fair 'nough



And just because tribunals have been misused does not mean they are inheritly immoral or biased.



The lack of appeal does disturb me, it provides little chance for error correction. There is a sort of appeals process, however, in that the decision can be reviewed by the Secretary of Defense. Still not optimal, though.



I disagree with this statement. I suspect the standards would be similar to what exist in traditional courts. The standards state only "Evidence that would have probative value to a reasonable person"; you adde dyour own interpretation to that to include heresay.

I do not know if it would include heresay or not, and you haven't shwon that it does, so this supports neither side of the argument until further information is gathered. Considering attorneys are posted for each side (the defendent can select their own or hire their own, as well), I would suspect it follows traditional court rules.



Then it becomes a difference of opinion.

The tribunal system is very similar to the military justice system that has been in place for the U.S. Military for years. That system is, within reasonable expectation, fair. There is the difference that the military justice system provides avenue for appeal (although limited), however.

So, while I'm not saying this is necessarily a good thing, it's not immediate evidence of evil, either. Most people tend to mentally flip when they hear the word "tribunal", because of the negative connotations of the word, but a tribunal is just a specific type of judging body. How it's actually implemented is the measure of whether or not it is "fair".

I think most people cringe when hearing "tribunals" because it brings up images of Paths of Glory, or when shell-shocked soldiers were shot for cowardice by kangaroo courts in WW1.

 

[chipmunk stew]

Do you realize the 19 hijackers trained right here in america?

OMG! Here in America?!? Are you serious?!? geggy, you're blowing my mind!!!111!1!!!!111!!1111!!!!!!!111!!1!!!

 

[Polaris]

That quote sounds like what exactly had happened to the israelis hunting for the culprits of the kidnappings of the israeli atheltes during the 1972 olympics. Interestingly, the kidnappings by the arabs happened on the date of sept 11...Have you ever read the book "vengeance" by george jonas? I'd highly recommend it. I have not yet seen the film, "Munich", though, which was based on the book.

I think this quote by mark twain is better suited for thequest, whom may have been fooled by the sept 11, 2001 attacks like many of us....

"whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority its time to pause and refleck..."

And the 1857 massacre of pioneer settlers, and the 1941 bombing of Buckingham Palace by the Luftwaffe were also on September 11!!!! AAAAAAAAAAAH!!! RUN!!!! SAVE YOURSELVES!!!!! AAAAAAAAAH!!!!! STOP DROP AND ROLL!!!!!

 

[kookbreaker]

And the 1857 massacre of pioneer settlers, and the 1941 bombing of Buckingham Palace by the Luftwaffe were also on September 11!!!! AAAAAAAAAAAH!!! RUN!!!! SAVE YOURSELVES!!!!! AAAAAAAAAH!!!!! STOP DROP AND ROLL!!!!!

Seriously, is geggy reading of an old bottle of Dr. Brommer's soap or something? I expect him to just start posting 'Jellyfish! Dinosaurs!" and just be done with it.

 

[Polaris]

I have to wonder what the repurcussions would be if some more, interesting people, became aware of LC and their ilk. Namely people like R. Lee Ermy, Ted Nugent, etc

It would also be great to see Shermer do a debunk in the same way as he approached the holocause deniers.

The definition of surreal: Dylan Avery confronting G. Gordon Liddy and backing him into a corner as Buzz Aldrin was. I would pay money to see the result.

As for Shermer: He didn't do a debunking of it that I know of, but there was a review of The New Pearl Harbor, by Griffin, in Skeptic Magazine:

http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/06-01-23.html

 

[Polaris]

No. No. No.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Coventry

Well, I guess someone ought to let John Keegan know. That's where I read it - his one volume history of World War Two, still in print.

Still, the only fact that was mistaken in the analogy was the specific city, so the analogy stands.

 

[Polaris]

And the 1857 massacre of pioneer settlers, and the 1941 bombing of Buckingham Palace by the Luftwaffe were also on September 11!!!! AAAAAAAAAAAH!!! RUN!!!! SAVE YOURSELVES!!!!! AAAAAAAAAH!!!!! STOP DROP AND ROLL!!!!!

And Steve Jones is a Mormon! The Church of Latter Day Nazionalsozielistische Partei Saints is trying to take over the US government and the world!!! DUCK AND COVER!!!!

 

[kookbreaker]

Well, I guess someone ought to let John Keegan know. That's where I read it - his one volume history of World War Two, still in print.

Keegan? Excuse me a moment.

**HAWWWWWWWWK PTOOOOOOO!!!***

Sorry, what were you saying?

Still, the only fact that was mistaken in the analogy was the specific city, so the analogy stands.

No, read it is again. Chruchhill knew a raid was coming, but not over which city. He could not have defended the target city any better than the usual English defenses could.

 

[Gravy]

I don't understand why you people are all hellbent on those activists who may well be cointelpros that advocates silly theories like the pod on planes, missile hit the pentagon, hologram, etc which may well be government propaganda in attempt to discredit the movement.

After you apologize, please name anyone on this forum who fits this description.

 

[Gravy]

And Steve Jones is a Mormon! The Church of Latter Day Nazionalsozielistische Partei Saints is trying to take over the US government and the world!!! DUCK AND COVER!!!!

So that's what Sword of Truth is doing here! Mods! Help! An intruder got past the screeners!

 

[steve s]

Interestingly, the kidnappings by the arabs happened on the date of sept 11...

Wrong as usual. It was Sept. 5th. You guys will do anything to make connections to Sept. 11th.

Steve S.

 

[Polaris]

Keegan? Excuse me a moment.

**HAWWWWWWWWK PTOOOOOOO!!!***

Sorry, what were you saying?



No, read it is again. Chruchhill knew a raid was coming, but not over which city. He could not have defended the target city any better than the usual English defenses could.

What's wrong with Keegan? I found his History of Warfare and Face of Battle to be exceptional.