[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Well, seeing how Bubba had such luck with his “criminal” mentality, I think we should hold a war mentality.
[/quote]
Yeah, that war mentality has got a lot accomplished hasn’t it?
Dustin
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
New York is not the only city in America.
What the fuck is that supposed to mean?
[/quote]
It means exactly what it says.
People like you are why terrorism is effective. You think and are led around by your emotions. Grieve and get over it. Remembering 9/11 is exactly what the terrorists want you to do because it means they can control you.
Ha! Do they control you?
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pat36 wrote:
Which were obviously acting alone and now that they’re dead, there is clearly nothing to be done, threat over.
P.S. Washington D.C. is also a city in America.
So what? There are always going to be threats to your life and safety. Every morning that you wake up and breath the air you are taking a risk. The amount of fear you have should be proportional to the probability of that threat manifesting itself. Dying in a terrorist plot has low probability–unless you live in Baghdad.
You should worry more about wearing your seatbelt.
Why are people so afraid of terrorists?[/quote]
There’s a difference between being obsessed with it, and being vigilent about doing what you can to prevent it from occuring. It’s a relatively lower probability now because there is a focus on stopping it.
Better question to you is whether you have a problem if terrorists are captured or killed before they do anything?
I sense a Michael Moore esque answer coming.
“If You Harbor Terrorists, You Are a Terrorist”
-George W Bush
Suicide hijackers taught to fly in America, says FBI
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/13/wfly13.xml
Hanjour a Study in Paradox
Washington Post
October 15, 2001
Over five years, Hanjour hopscotched among flight schools and airplane rental companies, but his instructors regarded him as a poor student, even in the weeks before the attacks.
Federal Aviation Administration records show he obtained a commercial pilot’s license in April 1999, but how and where he did so remains a lingering question that FAA officials refuse to discuss. His limited flying abilities do afford an insight into one feature of the attacks: The conspiracy apparently did not include a surplus of skilled pilots…
Professional commercial aviation pilots with years and thousands of hours of experience could not even hit the Twin Towers at full speed in an actual commercial flight simulator (much less the Pentagon as Hanjour did). Professional pilots, in this case one who actually certifies commercial pilots, explains the absurdity of the official 9/11 story
[quote]pat36 wrote:
And so was the U.S.S. Cole, and the Emabassy bombings in Nairobi and Kenya, and so was the first WTC bombing. If Clinton had bothered to get off her ass and do something about it, then. We’d have been in a much better situation now.[/quote]
2 posts to turn a 9/11 into a political talking point.
Kind of gross.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
New York is not the only city in America.
What the fuck is that supposed to mean?
It means exactly what it says.
People like you are why terrorism is effective. You think and are led around by your emotions. Grieve and get over it. Remembering 9/11 is exactly what the terrorists want you to do because it means they can control you.
Ha! Do they control you?[/quote]
Awareness is not fear. Vigilance is not paranoia. Simply taking the nihlist point of view and saying resistance is futile is exactly what the terrorists want.
In that regard it is the comfortably protected academic that facilitates this type of thinking…to the detriment of those for who terrorism is a very real threat. You may not care for NYC but millions of people live there and they deserve to be protected. Same for any community. NYC is a target
Simply because you take on the persona of Mr. Spock and write as an emotionless being doesn’t mean it is the right thing to do. It’s more of an internet drama then a philosophy to live by.
“They like dying and we like killing them, I can’t understand why we don’t get along better”
- Frank J
[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Conspiracy theories rest on the premise that the government is super-competent, and some number of higher ups managed to be competent enough to go across agencies and parties to coordinate something of this magnitude…
[/quote]
The “incompetence theory”…
"On the morning of Sept. 11, Goss and Graham were having breakfast with a Pakistani general named Mahmud Ahmed – the soon-to-be-sacked head of Pakistan’s intelligence service. Ahmed ran a spy agency notoriously close to Osama bin Laden and the Taliban…
“Top sources confirmed here on Tuesday, that the general lost his job because of the “evidence” India produced to show his links to one of the suicide bombers that wrecked the World Trade Centre. The US authorities sought his removal after confirming the fact that $100,000 were wired to WTC hijacker Mohammed Atta from Pakistan by Ahmad Umar Sheikh at the instance of Gen Mahumd.”
Goss and Sen Graham had breakfast with a Pakastani General (on 9/11 – not 9/9, 9/10 or 9/12 even) who had $100,000 wired to the lead hijacker. And what happened to the General – HE WAS FIRED… LOST HIS JOB! Like the guy at Burger King who always gets orders wrong or a guy who shows up late for work 3 times.
So please spare us the incompetence bullshit. Incompetence implies failure – if you ignore ALL of the administrations previously stated goals before 9/11 than yes, it APPEARS to be a failure.
If you actually look at what they wanted to do before 9/11, then you cannot envision ANYTHING except champagne and jubilant celebration as the Towers fell.
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
lixy wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
Links to back this up?
Get a clue.
That’s what I thought.
[/quote]
Here’s an idea: Why don’t you back up the claim that Osama Ben Laden was behind 9/11?
[quote]hedo wrote:
Awareness is not fear. Vigilance is not paranoia. Simply taking the nihlist point of view and saying resistance is futile is exactly what the terrorists want.
In that regard it is the comfortably protected academic that facilitates this type of thinking…to the detriment of those for who terrorism is a very real threat. You may not care for NYC but millions of people live there and they deserve to be protected. Same for any community. NYC is a target
Simply because you take on the persona of Mr. Spock and write as an emotionless being doesn’t mean it is the right thing to do. It’s more of an internet drama then a philosophy to live by.
“They like dying and we like killing them, I can’t understand why we don’t get along better”
- Frank J
[/quote]
I am not emotionless. I can be very emotional – however, I try not to be when it is precisely these emotions that criminals are trying to elicit. It is called “terrorism” because “terror” is the only outcome. Otherwise terrorists would be called revolutionaries or rebels or something less sinister. They are not after our sovereignty but our government will give them that by taking away our freedoms.
Your notion of protecting an entire city of millions of people is preposterous.
That whole city could be wiped out and the government can’t do a thing to protect it – in fact, government actually prevented the airlines from defending its property and the lives of its customers on 9/11 – what makes you think New York will ever be “safe”? More police? More laws? This is an illusion to make you think you’re safe. You’re not and never will be as long as the government meddles in other country’s affairs.
Governments can only retaliate – they cannot prevent every willful individual whom is motivated by hatred from attacking us. We’re fucked and it is the fault of the government.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
lixy wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
Links to back this up?
Get a clue.
In terorrist-ese: “I don’t need to back anything up”. [/quote]
The majority of the highjackers were Saudi Arabian, Bin Laden belongs to the second most influential family in Saudi Arabia, which also happens to be filthy rich and the Saudis have long standing tradition to finance islamist organizations.
Do your homework.
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
lixy wrote:
It was an act of war alright. Financed and perpetrated by Saudis.
Links to back this up?
[/quote]
You too.
[quote]Tokoya wrote:
Better question to you is whether you have a problem if terrorists are captured or killed before they do anything?
[/quote]
I have a problem when our government breaks laws to “protect” me. I have a problem with people being imprisoned who will never go to trial–that is anti-American. That is anti-liberty and it is wrong.
If the accused are guilty of a crime then let the facts speak for themselves in court with a jury present. Our judicial system has no problem convicting even innocent people–why are these suspects treated any differently than suspected murderers and rapists.
I am completely against killing unless it is to prevent the immediate killing of someone else. I do not weep for those that have no respect for human life.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
hedo wrote:
Awareness is not fear. Vigilance is not paranoia. Simply taking the nihlist point of view and saying resistance is futile is exactly what the terrorists want.
In that regard it is the comfortably protected academic that facilitates this type of thinking…to the detriment of those for who terrorism is a very real threat. You may not care for NYC but millions of people live there and they deserve to be protected. Same for any community. NYC is a target
Simply because you take on the persona of Mr. Spock and write as an emotionless being doesn’t mean it is the right thing to do. It’s more of an internet drama then a philosophy to live by.
“They like dying and we like killing them, I can’t understand why we don’t get along better”
- Frank J
I am not emotionless. I can be very emotional – however, I try not to be when it is precisely these emotions that criminals are trying to elicit. It is called “terrorism” because “terror” is the only outcome. Otherwise terrorists would be called revolutionaries or rebels or something less sinister. They are not after our sovereignty but our government will give them that by taking away our freedoms.
Your notion of protecting an entire city of millions of people is preposterous.
That whole city could be wiped out and the government can’t do a thing to protect it – in fact, government actually prevented the airlines from defending its property and the lives of its customers on 9/11 – what makes you think New York will ever be “safe”? More police? More laws? This is an illusion to make you think you’re safe. You’re not and never will be as long as the government meddles in other country’s affairs.
Governments can only retaliate – they cannot prevent every willful individual whom is motivated by hatred from attacking us. We’re fucked and it is the fault of the government.[/quote]
Well you have excercised your right to give up and quit trying. Nihlism at it’s finest.
The rest of us, especially those who work in NYC will just stay vigilant.
[quote]
BostonBarrister wrote:
Conspiracy theories rest on the premise that the government is super-competent, and some number of higher ups managed to be competent enough to go across agencies and parties to coordinate something of this magnitude…
JustTheFacts wrote:
The “incompetence theory”…
"On the morning of Sept. 11, Goss and Graham were having breakfast with a Pakistani general named Mahmud Ahmed – the soon-to-be-sacked head of Pakistan’s intelligence service. Ahmed ran a spy agency notoriously close to Osama bin Laden and the Taliban…
“Top sources confirmed here on Tuesday, that the general lost his job because of the “evidence” India produced to show his links to one of the suicide bombers that wrecked the World Trade Centre. The US authorities sought his removal after confirming the fact that $100,000 were wired to WTC hijacker Mohammed Atta from Pakistan by Ahmad Umar Sheikh at the instance of Gen Mahumd.”
Goss and Sen Graham had breakfast with a Pakastani General (on 9/11 – not 9/9, 9/10 or 9/12 even) who had $100,000 wired to the lead hijacker. And what happened to the General – HE WAS FIRED… LOST HIS JOB! Like the guy at Burger King who always gets orders wrong or a guy who shows up late for work 3 times.
So please spare us the incompetence bullshit. Incompetence implies failure – if you ignore ALL of the administrations previously stated goals before 9/11 than yes, it APPEARS to be a failure.
If you actually look at what they wanted to do before 9/11, then you cannot envision ANYTHING except champagne and jubilant celebration as the Towers fell.[/quote]
You are one twisted individual. I am happy to not inhabit the same swamp fever of disturbed reality that it would take to believe this horse manure.
I’m glad you think that the internal workings of the Pakistani government give you some support for your fantasies. The internal problems of the Pakistani government - particularly its intelligence forces - are well known. This general was the head of that security force. Also known is that the Pakistani security forces have actively supported al Queda and the Taliban, and that they were involved in selling nuclear secrets to Iran and North Korea. It’s also known that Mushareff has had several attempts on his life, and that he believes that the Pakistani security forces were involves in at least some of them.
But if you believe that, despite all logic and probability, the President could order some other outcome to occur inside Pakistan - by ordering Mushareff, who holds power by a thread, perhaps? - it’s par for the course.
[quote]lixy wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
lixy wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
Links to back this up?
Get a clue.
That’s what I thought.
Here’s an idea: Why don’t you back up the claim that Osama Ben Laden was behind 9/11? [/quote]
Do you havew a secret Lixy…who did it…the Jews? GWB?
[quote]hedo wrote:
Do you havew a secret Lixy…who did it…the Jews? GWB?
[/quote]
I’d put my money on a bunch of angry Arabs, but it’s not like any of you can prove that Ben Laden did it, now can you?
Of course, there’s the remote possibility that somebody in the administration knew about it and let the operation roll nonetheless. And Jewish Zionists aren’t stupid to risk fucking up the status quo that’s largely in their favor just to trigger a global “war on terror”.
My point stands that Saudi manpower and money is what makes Al-Qaeda run. If you need any proof of that, then you haven’t been paying the least bit of attention over the last decade.
[quote]hedo wrote:
Well you have excercised your right to give up and quit trying. Nihlism at it’s finest.
The rest of us, especially those who work in NYC will just stay vigilant.
[/quote]
What exactly are we trying for? What are the goals – to make people less free and to inconvenience the rest of the world so a few of the power-elite in NYC can feel safe? Give me a break.
We certainly aren’t going to rid the world of people who hate us by continuing to breed hatred. Why don’t we focus on that first?
The idea that 9/11 was a vast government conspiracy is stupid. Then again, so is the idea that there is a link between 9/11 and Iraq. Apparently, you can get some people to believe anything.
[quote]mstott25 wrote:
You don’t think there’s anything suspicious about 9/11 that is worth investigating? You don’t think it’s a bit odd that after the 1993 WTC bombings and the 9/11 attacks we’ve had numerous accounts of FBI having prior knowledge?
Didn’t you find it a bit odd that the FBI found all of the clues about the hijackers identities, backgrounds, and motives in Mohamed Atta’s luggage? Why does a dead man need to check luggage five hours before he dies again?
We know the US was guilty of false flag operations in 1953 to overthrow the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran. We know a US administration came up with a sinister plan to incite war with Cuba in 1962 titled Operation Northwoods. If the US was capable of these atrocious acts 50 years ago what makes you think they are no longer capable of them today?
What I find repulsive is not somebody who questions what the government states as fact but somebody who cannot muster enough fortitude to conduct a little research on their own and keep their government accountable.
[/quote]
Firstly, check out the link to the book on the intelligence failures – that is what they were, intelligence failures. The government should be held accountable for failures. The structural problems need to be changed. Bureaucrats need to be fired. Politicians need to be taken to task.
Secondly, do you not see the categorical difference between the CIA planning foreign operations, hypothetical or otherwise, versus and idea of a conspiracy that involved state and federal governmental officials and the military in an organized attack on the United States. Which was not only kept amazingly secret – unlike those top-secret plans for foreign ops, mind you – but also so well executed as to leave no actual proof of its existence.
Take a pill. In addition, a little snark on my pet peeve: review your grammar. “Somebody” is singular; “their” is plural.
[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Firstly, check out the link to the book on the intelligence failures – that is what they were, intelligence failures. The government should be held accountable for failures. The structural problems need to be changed. Bureaucrats need to be fired. Politicians need to be taken to task.
[/quote]
How exactly does one take a politician to task? Once they are in its too late. We have to wait two years and as many as six to fire them and then just replace them with another establishment candidate because people are too lazy to get politically involved. Believe it or not, the majority of people don’t sit at their computer discussing politics.
How can the government be held accountable for anything it does? We can put politicians in jail but that doesn’t fix the system. Our government is a systemic failure because we have strayed from the Constitution–which defines our rule of law.