Homicide Bomber Kills 10 at Iraqi Army Checkpoint

[egj13]

Not suicide bombers anymore? I think I like the change.

[240 is Back]

I'm mixed on this one.  It sounds cooler and is supposed to immasculate the bomber.  But as a news piece viewer, I would like to know if the a-hole got away or not. 

And it's repetitive.   "Homicide bomber kills 10".  Well, obviously I know he's homicidal, as he just killed ten folks.  Then, I'd see "Bomber was also killed".   So, instead of "Suicide bomber kills 10", we have to read "Homicidal bomber kills 10 and himself".

[egj13]

I'm mixed on this one.  It sounds cooler and is supposed to immasculate the bomber.  But as a news piece viewer, I would like to know if the a-hole got away or not. 

And it's repetitive.   "Homicide bomber kills 10".  Well, obviously I know he's homicidal, as he just killed ten folks.  Then, I'd see "Bomber was also killed".   So, instead of "Suicide bomber kills 10", we have to read "Homicidal bomber kills 10 and himself".

geesh, talk about reading into it! Good thought though

[240 is Back]

geesh, talk about reading into it! Good thought though

 

[egj13]

I am seeing a trend here, people read into everything!

[240 is Back]

Yep.  I also analyze events to see who capitalizes, who manipulates coverage and investigations, and above all, I will argue the sky isn't blue, just because I like to argue.

[egj13]

Yep.  I also analyze events to see who capitalizes, who manipulates coverage and investigations, and above all, I will argue the sky isn't blue, just because I like to argue.

Well this could be fun. I love to debate but will take either side of it to make sure both sides are represented. I notice here if you debate for a side you get labeled quickly, should be interesting. I am suprised how quick people are to shut out the other side.

[240 is Back]

Well this could be fun. I love to debate but will take either side of it to make sure both sides are represented. I notice here if you debate for a side you get labeled quickly, should be interesting. I am suprised how quick people are to shut out the other side.

Also, if you present evidence of wrongdoing, instead of looking at the facts, it will be disregarded because of its "crazy conspiracy theory" source.

I can post a link to 29 specific foreign intel warnings of Bush being warned about 9/11 - and this page links to 29 sources of MAINSTREAM media - FOX, ABC, CNN, etc.

People won't look at it.  Then, they'll spend all night telling you that you're wrong, without even knowing what they're arguing against.  it's a sheep mentality.  It makes them feel better, like they're on a WINNING team. 

[egj13]

Also, if you present evidence of wrongdoing, instead of looking at the facts, it will be disregarded because of its "crazy conspiracy theory" source.

I can post a link to 29 specific foreign intel warnings of Bush being warned about 9/11 - and this page links to 29 sources of MAINSTREAM media - FOX, ABC, CNN, etc.

People won't look at it.  Then, they'll spend all night telling you that you're wrong, without even knowing what they're arguing against.  it's a sheep mentality.  It makes them feel better, like they're on a WINNING team. 

Well I will tell you now that I don't buy into CTs. I bet your links are correct. I believe that Bush may have been warned. What comes next is 2 different views on why he might not have acted, yours and mine. I would love to be able to ask him what was going on leading up to that day. Granted I would tend to take him at his word because I do that with everyone until you prove me wrong for doing so. I can only imagine the things that would be happening if info like that came in.

You will have to explain this statement to me because it looks like double talk

if you present evidence of wrongdoing, instead of looking at the facts  Wouldn't evidence be the facts?

[240 is Back]

I don't follow the wording.

I would like to see a second 9/11 investigation.  The first one had a paltry $13mil and was unable to see 90% of the things they asked for.  4 of 10 of the commissioners have already called for a second investigation. 

We do know - it's public record - that the FBI, CIA gave very specific threats on the same day that Germany gave us the hijack date, target, and 5 of the hijackers names.   That's huge.  Bush's response, oddly, was to STOP the investigation of atta and his 18 friends in hollywood, florida.  How weird is that?