Funny thing about our enemies...

[Dos Equis]

What a weak response.  You claim somone, who now you won't name, consipired to kill the 168 people you mention.  Then you claim I ignore evidence, when you yourself completely ignore the (entirely conclusive) evidence presented to you that Timothy McVeigh was actually responsible.  Sigh, you are a lost cause, I only hope everyone else notices your many incosistencies and fact-bendings.

He also believes McVeigh was not really executed. 

[240 is Back]

What a weak response.  You claim somone, who now you won't name, consipired to kill the 168 people you mention.  Then you claim I ignore evidence, when you yourself completely ignore the (entirely conclusive) evidence presented to you that Timothy McVeigh was actually responsible.  Sigh, you are a lost cause, I only hope everyone else notices your many incosistencies and fact-bendings.

I claim that a great deal of evidence exists that more than just mecveigh/nicholls were involved.

Of course McVeigh was involved and guilty.  But there were two large bombs in the building which were removed by authorities.  McVeigh, by their timeline and building security, certainly did not carry them in the front door of a federal building that day.

I can show you the FEMA documents detailing the two large bombs if you want.  If you can explain how McVeigh put them in the building, then how they were scrubbed from the record, go for it! 


*BTW - it would be irresponsible to place blame.  I simply just showed the errors in the official story and reiterated the ened for a second investigation.  And it looks like in OKC, they're going to get one shortly.

[240 is Back]

He also believes McVeigh was not really executed. 

No.  I simply stated that two of the ten witnesses said in interviews that oddly, McVeigh was still breathing when they closed the curtain, AFTER he had been declared dead.

You can take this info as you wish. 

[BRUCE]

I claim that a great deal of evidence exists that more than just mecveigh/nicholls were involved.

Of course McVeigh was involved and guilty.  But there were two large bombs in the building which were removed by authorities.  McVeigh, by their timeline and building security, certainly did not carry them in the front door of a federal building that day.

I can show you the FEMA documents detailing the two large bombs if you want.  If you can explain how McVeigh put them in the building, then how they were scrubbed from the record, go for it! 


*BTW - it would be irresponsible to place blame.  I simply just showed the errors in the official story and reiterated the ened for a second investigation.  And it looks like in OKC, they're going to get one shortly.

That's a much better, and more moderate, post - even if I don't necessarily agree with all you say.

[240 is Back]

That's a much better, and more moderate, post - even if I don't necessarily agree with all you say.

I invite you to research the topic further.

here is one interpretation of the day's events.  While many would label the website as "conspiracy crap", they source each fact with rela mainstream media sources.  You can even read the FEMA documents from the US Govts own website.  It's unexplainable:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/ok.html



Many people who think the idea of 9/11 is silly, will look at events of Oklahoma City and will accuse the FBI, ATF, or Clinton of wrongdoing.  indeed, each has some questions to answer about that day (FBI ignored a great deal of evidence accorsing to Congress, every ATF agent kept his/her children home from work and were out of the building at 9:01 when the blast happened, while their secretaries and families were killed.)

I don't know what happened, but the evidence certainly says the official story is wrong.

[Hugo Chavez]

Ding ding ding!  Hey we agree on something.    You of all people should not be correcting anyone's grammar.  I made a mistake.  Trying to multi-task.  It can be very difficult to slap you around and manage a business at the same time.  Challenging.  

Several on this board, particularly you and 240, have used the term "neocon" to describe basically any Republican or conservative, especially those who disagree with you.  That's where the "CONNOTATIVE meaning" comes from.    

You made a mistake trying to send me to the dictionary, don't try an twist it, you bought it, own it twerp.  And unless you get some examples where we are using it to describe all republicans you're full of shit end of story... Much of my family are republicans and none of them are neocons... I wouldn't make that mistake...     You are a pathetic liar.

[BRUCE]

You made a mistake trying to send me to the dictionary, don't try an twist it, you bought it, own it twerp.  And unless you get some examples where we are using it to describe all republicans you're full of shit end of story... Much of my family are republicans and none of them are neocons... I wouldn't make that mistake...     You are a pathetic liar.

Wow, just spitting bile, aren't you?  Not much 'moderate' in this Moderator, unfortunately.

[240 is Back]

Wow, just spitting bile, aren't you?  Not much 'moderate' in this Moderator, unfortunately.

berserker is an angry man, sure.  But beach Bum has continually characterized our definition of "neocon" as "republican", despite the fact we're both republicans who dislike the neocon sliver of the party.

The moderate republicans are starting to become visible again.  They're the ones who don't want to give Bush 5 more years in iraq.  They're the ones who want to slow down the spending and take a closer look at domestic spying.  They are strong on defense and want to fix the border, and see no sense in a "maintenance" level of 21,500 forces when the number should either be 150k, or zero.

The moderate republicans are returning.  beach bum's religious beliefs won't let him accept he's been trumpeting the neocon message for the last year, so he's trying to merge the groups.

[Dos Equis]

You made a mistake trying to send me to the dictionary, don't try an twist it, you bought it, own it twerp.  And unless you get some examples where we are using it to describe all republicans you're full of shit end of story... Much of my family are republicans and none of them are neocons... I wouldn't make that mistake...     You are a pathetic liar.

Oh darn.  And I care so much about your opinion.  What I will do now? 

Hey they're coming to get your guns!  lol. 

[Dos Equis]

berserker is an angry man, sure.  But beach Bum has continually characterized our definition of "neocon" as "republican", despite the fact we're both republicans who dislike the neocon sliver of the party.

Oh so you're a Republican this week?  Riiiiight.  You were a Republican, then not, then a libertarian, then not.  Make up your mind man. 

And Berserker is a Republican?  Bwahaha!  Stop it.  You guys are killing me today.     lol . . .

[240 is Back]

Oh so you're a Republican this week?  Riiiiight.  You were a Republican, then not, then a libertarian, then not.  Make up your mind man. 

And Berserker is a Republican?  Bwahaha!  Stop it.  You guys are killing me today.     lol . . .

You don't understand the core beliefs of the Republican party.

Bush got elected on them.  Look them up.

No nation building, strong national security starting at home on the border, energy problem solving thru ingenuity, not starting wars.




You really don't understand the difference, do you?

[BRUCE]

berserker is an angry man, sure.  But beach Bum has continually characterized our definition of "neocon" as "republican", despite the fact we're both republicans who dislike the neocon sliver of the party.

The moderate republicans are starting to become visible again.  They're the ones who don't want to give Bush 5 more years in iraq.  They're the ones who want to slow down the spending and take a closer look at domestic spying.  They are strong on defense and want to fix the border, and see no sense in a "maintenance" level of 21,500 forces when the number should either be 150k, or zero.

The moderate republicans are returning.  beach bum's religious beliefs won't let him accept he's been trumpeting the neocon message for the last year, so he's trying to merge the groups.

Okay, but you'll have to do much more to convince me you're a moderate Republican.  I do appreciate your ability to raise these issues without putting anyone down or abusing, though - Beserker should take note.

[240 is Back]

Okay, but you'll have to do much more to convince me you're a moderate Republican.  I do appreciate your ability to raise these issues without putting anyone down or abusing, though - Beserker should take note.

I have voted republican in every election in my life.  I actually converted several dems to vote for Bush.  I am very strong for justice, minimal govt interference in our lives, minimal welfare for the lazy, strong defense, etc etc. 

Lately though - after learning about the incredible coverup of 9/11 events* and the resulting elective wars on weak intel, I have seen the Bush admin going in a direction which actually encourages MORE govt waste, MORE govt involvement and control in our lives, LESS justice, etc.

Bush does not represent many republicans.  Beach bum continues to tell us that you have to be behind bush on every call to be a republican.  That is not the case.


*911 => NORAD lied about 45 minutes - complete standdown.  An FAA supervisor smashed and discarded the flight contorller recordings of that morning.  These two groups were not questinoed despite their actions being responsbile for the planes reaching their targets.  Bush also lied to us about what he knew when on 9/11 - AA records show his secret service detail knew at 8:17 am about hijackings.  Bush told the media at 9:00 that he thuoght it was a bad pilot.  By then, his personal team had been told about 3 of the hijackings.   he knew 3 planes had been hijacked when he walked into that classroom.  (these are facts readily available by the 911 commission)

[BRUCE]

I have voted republican in every election in my life.  I actually converted several dems to vote for Bush.  I am very strong for justice, minimal govt interference in our lives, minimal welfare for the lazy, strong defense, etc etc. 

Lately though - after learning about the incredible coverup of 9/11 events* and the resulting elective wars on weak intel, I have seen the Bush admin going in a direction which actually encourages MORE govt waste, MORE govt involvement and control in our lives, LESS justice, etc.

Bush does not represent many republicans.  Beach bum continues to tell us that you have to be behind bush on every call to be a republican.  That is not the case.


*911 => NORAD lied about 45 minutes - complete standdown.  An FAA supervisor smashed and discarded the flight contorller recordings of that morning.  These two groups were not questinoed despite their actions being responsbile for the planes reaching their targets.  Bush also lied to us about what he knew when on 9/11 - AA records show his secret service detail knew at 8:17 am about hijackings.  Bush told the media at 9:00 that he thuoght it was a bad pilot.  By then, his personal team had been told about 3 of the hijackings.   he knew 3 planes had been hijacked when he walked into that classroom.  (these are facts readily available by the 911 commission)

I followed everything you said right up the the 9/11 part. I totally agree that Bush may be the leader of the Republicans, but not necessarily represent them all 100%.  Despite this I believe he is a good leader and has made good of some very tough decisions.

[240 is Back]

I followed everything you said right up the the 9/11 part. I totally agree that Bush may be the leader of the Republicans, but not necessarily represent them all 100%.  Despite this I believe he is a good leader and has made good of some very tough decisions.

I loved Bush.  I had stickers everywhere.  I used to try to pick fights with Gore supporters in college. I mean, I was hardcore!!!!!

BRUCE, if you look into the events on 9/11, you will agree something smells very very bad.  Four of the ten members of the 911 Commission itself have already come out and said we need a new investigation.  It's very scary and very hard to look at, but if it interests you, look at it and see if the "Conspiracy theorists" are really as crazy as they're labeled.  Fact of the matter is, most people who watch an hour documentary on it will walk away with at least one "smoking gun" of the 9/11 story that absolutely does not make sense.

I don't say "The govt" did it, because more in power would balk at the idea of helping the evil terrorists.  But after watching clips on it, there is no doubt in my mind that those 19 arabs had serious help from white guys in ties ON 9/11, as well as in the denial then crippling of an investigation.

But heck, the first time I heard it, I almost got into a fistfight with the prick with the audacity to say it.  I'm an MBA with a degree in history.  And it took me a year to really believe it.  So for others, the mind just can't handle it now, and never would even with signed confessions in front of them.

And I don't claim to know who did what.  I know Bush was in charge, and the man in charge is the one who should do a complete invetigation into huge holes in the story. 

911 Power Hour - Very well reasoned case with undeniable facts

911 Mysteries - Focused upon why the towers fell, best case for controlled demolition

[BRUCE]

I loved Bush.  I had stickers everywhere.  I used to try to pick fights with Gore supporters in college. I mean, I was hardcore!!!!!

BRUCE, if you look into the events on 9/11, you will agree something smells very very bad.  Four of the ten members of the 911 Commission itself have already come out and said we need a new investigation.  It's very scary and very hard to look at, but if it interests you, look at it and see if the "Conspiracy theorists" are really as crazy as they're labeled.  Fact of the matter is, most people who watch an hour documentary on it will walk away with at least one "smoking gun" of the 9/11 story that absolutely does not make sense.

I don't say "The govt" did it, because more in power would balk at the idea of helping the evil terrorists.  But after watching clips on it, there is no doubt in my mind that those 19 arabs had serious help from white guys in ties ON 9/11, as well as in the denial then crippling of an investigation.

But heck, the first time I heard it, I almost got into a fistfight with the prick with the audacity to say it.  I'm an MBA with a degree in history.  And it took me a year to really believe it.  So for others, the mind just can't handle it now, and never would even with signed confessions in front of them.

And I don't claim to know who did what.  I know Bush was in charge, and the man in charge is the one who should do a complete invetigation into huge holes in the story. 

911 Power Hour - Very well reasoned case with undeniable facts

911 Mysteries - Focused upon why the towers fell, best case for controlled demolition

I think too much happened in those hours for us to get exact clarity in everything that happened.  I love a good conspiracy theory, no matter how far fetched.  Not because I believe, but because I am constantly amazed at the vividness of some peoples' imaginations, especially when it fits their agenda.  Here's a great article illustrating that, and the deep seated anger and abuse that resides within people, particularly of the left, when someone dares to disagree:

 http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11818067/the_low_post_the_hopeless_stupidity_of_911_conspiracies

[240 is Back]

I think too much happened in those hours for us to get exact clarity in everything that happened.  I love a good conspiracy theory, no matter how far fetched.  Not because I believe, but because I am constantly amazed at the vividness of some peoples' imaginations, especially when it fits their agenda.  Here's a great article illustrating that, and the deep seated anger and abuse that resides within people, particularly of the left, when someone dares to disagree:

 http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11818067/the_low_post_the_hopeless_stupidity_of_911_conspiracies

I've read that.  The author makes it a partisan issue, which 911 DEFINITELY is NOT.


BRUCE, throughout history, govts have used false attacks to gain public support for foreign policy which they know would be unpopular.  9/11 meant 4 wars in the middle east, which means the US will prevent China from being a superpower for the next 50 years.  In a utilitarian sense, economically, 911 actually HELPED america, in the long term.   I'm not naive about that.  But I think you are being naive if your only retort is "they wouldn't do that, and people who say they would don't like Bush".

[Eyeball Chambers]

The moderate republicans are starting to become visible again.

[BRUCE]

I've read that.  The author makes it a partisan issue, which 911 DEFINITELY is NOT.


BRUCE, throughout history, govts have used false attacks to gain public support for foreign policy which they know would be unpopular.  9/11 meant 4 wars in the middle east, which means the US will prevent China from being a superpower for the next 50 years.  In a utilitarian sense, economically, 911 actually HELPED america, in the long term.   I'm not naive about that.  But I think you are being naive if your only retort is "they wouldn't do that, and people who say they would don't like Bush".

Herein lies my issue with these theories.  If we wanted to make a case for invading Iraq, then we did a real bad job of it by staging 9/11.  It's needlessly complicated, and the end result does't give us a very good reason for attacking Iraq anyway.  There are far easier ways to kill people, stage it, and mount a case for war - 9/11 isn't one of them.

[240 is Back]

Herein lies my issue with these theories.  If we wanted to make a case for invading Iraq, then we did a real bad job of it by staging 9/11.  It's needlessly complicated, and the end result does't give us a very good reason for attacking Iraq anyway.  There are far easier ways to kill people, stage it, and mount a case for war - 9/11 isn't one of them.

911 would have been the pretext for afghanistan.  Recall that US/Taleban oil pipeline negotiations ended in July when they, despite our threats of "choose a carpet of bombs or die under a carpet of bombs" - google it - and they signed with an Argentenian oil firm.  We then told UK and India we'd be invading in mid-oct. This was june 01.

Bruce, it's kinda pointless for us to argue on different points;  I have watched the video clips, and despite my initial disbelief, at the end, I was convinced there was some serious enough evidence to show compliance here with the 19 arabs.

If you can, choose one of the documentaries and check it out.  I am an educated man who supported Bush 100%, and while it took some soul-searching and confusion, at the end of watching some and doing add'l research, I reached my conclusions.

Since you haven't watched one, it's kinda silly for us to debate whether there's any legitimacy to it.  (It'd be like you and I arguing over which Aussie beach is nicest, when I have no background information). 

Check one out, see what you think.  But we cannot debate with different background info here.
http://www.jonhs.net/911/index.php

[BRUCE]

911 would have been the pretext for afghanistan.  Recall that US/Taleban oil pipeline negotiations ended in July when they, despite our threats of "choose a carpet of bombs or die under a carpet of bombs" - google it - and they signed with an Argentenian oil firm.  We then told UK and India we'd be invading in mid-oct. This was june 01.

Bruce, it's kinda pointless for us to argue on different points;  I have watched the video clips, and despite my initial disbelief, at the end, I was convinced there was some serious enough evidence to show compliance here with the 19 arabs.

If you can, choose one of the documentaries and check it out.  I am an educated man who supported Bush 100%, and while it took some soul-searching and confusion, at the end of watching some and doing add'l research, I reached my conclusions.

Since you haven't watched one, it's kinda silly for us to debate whether there's any legitimacy to it.  (It'd be like you and I arguing over which Aussie beach is nicest, when I have no background information). 

Check one out, see what you think.  But we cannot debate with different background info here.
http://www.jonhs.net/911/index.php

You assume I'm not familiar 9/11 conspiracy theories, which is wrong, and makes your beach analogy defunct.  But just for the record, Bondi is the nicest, and I'll kill anyone on this website that says different 

I too would also like to declare that I am a 'bush' man.

[240 is Back]

You assume I'm not familiar 9/11 conspiracy theories, which is wrong, and makes your beach analogy defunct.  But just for the record, Bondi is the nicest, and I'll kill anyone on this website that says different 

I too would also like to declare that I am a 'bush' man.

Can you tell me what you estimate to be the biggest 5 smoking guns of the 911 truthers, and why each one is wrong?

[BRUCE]

Can you tell me what you estimate to be the biggest 5 smoking guns of the 911 truthers, and why each one is wrong?

That's some assignment you've set me, and I'm not sure if I know exactly what you mean by 'truthers'.  I'll compromise with you, here is what I think are the 5 most mysterious events surrounding 9/11, keeping in mind I don't believe anything was covered up:

- Still no footage of a plane hitting the Pentagon
- Why did the tower hit first, fall last?
- The lack of debris around United Flight 93
- The recovered terrorist's passport from NYC streets, yet lack of black boxes
- Three buildings all toppled by fire; the first three ever, on the same day

But that's just 9/11 for you, it was a weird day.  I hope this satisfies your request.

[Dos Equis]

Wow, just spitting bile, aren't you?  Not much 'moderate' in this Moderator, unfortunately.

That's actually pretty mild from him.  Must be taking his meds today.   

[Dos Equis]

The moderate republicans are returning.  beach bum's religious beliefs won't let him accept he's been trumpeting the neocon message for the last year, so he's trying to merge the groups.

O Rly?  And what exactly are my religious beliefs?