So military genius HH6 how many minutes does it take?

[MuscleMcMannus]

The Chinese, Russian and Iranian armies are all better than ours, outdated equipment and all! 

No one is arguing that they are better or more powerful or any of that shit.  But you guys act like we can take over the world with your stupid macho bullshit.  Our fucking country is bankrupt and we can't afford our 6000 military bases all over the world.  Iran wouldn't be a cakewalk to if we went to war with them.  

[OzmO]

No you're absolutely right.  My point was we can sit there and argue about who knew what, when etc.  Bottomline is someone knew something and our military, intelligence, government failed the American people. 

And they know about hundreds of others things everyday that don't end up coming true.

[OzmO]

No one is arguing that they are better or more powerful or any of that shit.  But you guys act like we can take over the world with your stupid macho bullshit.  Our fucking country is bankrupt and we can't afford our 6000 military bases all over the world.  Iran wouldn't be a cakewalk to if we went to war with them.  

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

[MuscleMcMannus]

And they know about hundreds of others things everyday that don't end up coming true.

It's deeper than that.  If you are clueless on the subject please don't post generic retorts that offer absolutely zero evidence regarding 9/11.  Afterall, you are a "Mod" on a political forum.   

PBS: NSA could have prevented 9/11 hijackings

Raw Story
January 27, 2009


The super-secretive National Security Agency has been quietly monitoring, decrypting, and interpreting foreign communications for decades, starting long before it came under criticism as a result of recent revelations about the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program. Now a forthcoming PBS documentary asks whether the NSA could have prevented 9/11 if it had been more willing to share its data with other agencies.

Author James Bamford looked into the performance of the NSA in his 2008 book, The Shadow Factory, and found that it had been closely monitoring the 9/11 hijackers as they moved freely around the United States and communicated with Osama bin Laden's operations center in Yemen. The NSA had even tapped bin Laden's satellite phone, starting in 1996.

"The NSA never alerted any other agency that the terrorists were in the United States and moving across the country towards Washington," Bamford told PBS.

PBS also found that "the 9/11 Commission never looked closely into NSA's role in the broad intelligence breakdown behind the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks. If they had, they would have understood the full extent to which the agency had major pieces of the puzzle but never put them together or disclosed their entire body of knowledge to the CIA and the FBI."

In a review of Bamford's book, former senator and 9/11 Commission member Bob Kerrey wrote, "As the 9/11 Commission later established, U.S. intelligence officials knew that al-Qaeda had held a planning meeting in Malaysia, found out the names of two recruits who had been present -- Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi -- and suspected that one and maybe both of them had flown to Los Angeles. Bamford reveals that the NSA had been eavesdropping for months on their calls to Yemen, yet the agency 'never made the effort' to trace where the calls originated. 'At any time, had the FBI been notified, they could have found Hazmi in a matter of seconds.'"

Former CIA analyst Michael Scheuer told PBS, "None of this information that we're speaking about this evening's in the 9/11 Commission report. They simply ignored all of it."

Not only was then-Director Michael Hayden never held accountable for the NSA's alleged failure, but he went on to oversee the Bush administration's vast expansion of domestic surveillance. In 2006, he was appointed as director of the CIA.

When asked whether the NSA's warrantless eavesdropping violated FISA law, Hayden insisted, "I have an order whose lawfulness has been attested to by the attorney general, an order whose lawfulness has been attested to by NSA lawyers who do this for a living. No, we're not violating the law. ... I'm asserting that NSA is doing its job."

NSA's power to eavesdrop on ordinary Americans has vastly increased since 2001, and the government's secret watch list now includes over a half a million names. PBS raises serious questions about whether important clues are still being missed simply as a result of the sheer volume of data being collected.

The Spy Factory will be shown over most PBS stations on February 3, 2009 at 8 pm.

The following preview was posted by NOVAonline at YouTube.


NOVA Investigates the NSA

[OzmO]

It's deeper than that.  If you are clueless on the subject please don't post generic retorts that offer absolutely zero evidence regarding 9/11.  Afterall, you are a "Mod" on a political forum.   

First off, I do what ever the fvck I want.  If you don't like it too bad, and don't presume to tell me how to post. 

Second I'm far from clueless.  I've delved into this 9/11 fantasy with many many people hear on this forum for the last 2 years arguing things from Holograms of planes being projected from helicopters flying around the WTC's to secret squads of patriots executing the passengers of the pentagon flight.

What marvels me is the level of ignorance when it comes to CT'ers applying their logic in areas they know little about.  There were warnings and huge intelligence failures for many reasons many of which have been addressed and fixed.

 

[MuscleMcMannus]

First off, I do what ever the fvck I want.  If you don't like it too bad, and don't presume to tell me how to post. 

Second I'm far from clueless.  I've delved into this 9/11 fantasy with many many people hear on this forum for the last 2 years arguing things from Holograms of planes being projected from helicopters flying around the WTC's to secret squads of patriots executing the passengers of the pentagon flight.

What marvels me is the level of ignorance when it comes to CT'ers applying their logic in areas they know little about.  There were warnings and huge intelligence failures for many reasons many of which have been addressed and fixed.

 

What marvels me is the level of ignorance when it comes to 9/11 apologists applying their logic in areas they know little about.

So everyone who questions the official story is a tin hat wearing conspiracy theorist?  I don't want to open up the stupid 9/11 debate but bottomline is if you think 9/11 was a result of "intelligence failures" you are clueless.  There is a lot more to the story than that.  Failure is a nice word when describing the ineptness and complete incompetence of the U.S. military and the U.S. Government.  But you're probably one of the fools that believe buildings pancake at free fall speeds due to planes flying into them.  LMAO!

[240 is Back]

yeah, 'ct' is a broad title.

Man #1 looks at evidence and realizes wow, Bush chose not to act despite very good intel about 911.

Man #2 lives in mom's basement and spends 23 hours a day studying alien brainwashing theories and all that.

They are both CTers by that general definition, along with men like Coach who believe in a "clinton body count", as he likes to talk about.

Some people group them all together.  That's fine.  but it's inaccurate.  As HH6 will agree - many many CTs are true.

[MuscleMcMannus]

yeah, 'ct' is a broad title.

Man #1 looks at evidence and realizes wow, Bush chose not to act despite very good intel about 911.

Man #2 lives in mom's basement and spends 23 hours a day studying alien brainwashing theories and all that.

They are both CTers by that general definition, along with men like Coach who believe in a "clinton body count", as he likes to talk about.

Some people group them all together.  That's fine.  but it's inaccurate.  As HH6 will agree - many many CTs are true.

We are not talking about bigfoot or lockness monsters here.  We are talking about Government.  Skepticism is not the same as conspiracy theory.  MK Ultra was real.  For anyone to spoonfeed the official 9/11 story is fucking stupid. 

[OzmO]

What marvels me is the level of ignorance when it comes to 9/11 apologists applying their logic in areas they know little about.

So everyone who questions the official story is a tin hat wearing conspiracy theorist?  I don't want to open up the stupid 9/11 debate but bottomline is if you think 9/11 was a result of "intelligence failures" you are clueless.  There is a lot more to the story than that.  Failure is a nice word when describing the ineptness and complete incompetence of the U.S. military and the U.S. Government.  But you're probably one of the fools that believe buildings pancake at free fall speeds due to planes flying into them.  LMAO!

No, if you question the "official story" you are NOT a CT'er.  I question the official story and fully support and want another investigation.  But I'm not some paranoid idiot who believes that secret agents secretly flew the pentagon flight to a secret base where they disposed of the passengers.  When or IF and another investigation is conducted the details and the people who are responsible for these failures will be exposed.  What happened on 9/11 was a combination of ineptness and what they were trained and prepared for which wasn't domestic passenger planes flying into buildings, but instead an attack from the Soviet Union on the eastern sea board from the Atlantic.

But you're probably one of the fools that believe buildings pancake at free fall speeds due to planes flying into them.  LMAO!

This is a great example of what i was talking about when it comes to people without expertise applying logic to it.  Those building did exactly what they should have done.  Are you suggesting they were wired to blow?    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH AH

You should watch that south park episode, it's right up your ally.  

[OzmO]

yeah, 'ct' is a broad title.

Man #1 looks at evidence and realizes wow, Bush chose not to act despite very good intel about 911.

Man #2 lives in mom's basement and spends 23 hours a day studying alien brainwashing theories and all that.

They are both CTers by that general definition, along with men like Coach who believe in a "clinton body count", as he likes to talk about.

Some people group them all together.  That's fine.  but it's inaccurate.  As HH6 will agree - many many CTs are true.

Good luck proving that one, because there is much "other" good intel that never happens

[IFBBwannaB]

Wow.  that is some messed up thinking.

We voted in Bush to protect us.  "It doesn't matter" if he let 3000 people die?

"It doesn't matter" if a member of our govt gave an order to allow a terror act to occur? 

That is illegal, in case you didn't know that.




I don't konw what else to say.  I really don't.  That quote says it all about you.

You missed the point, the point being that your CT is BS and doesn't hold water.
What I meant is that even if we go by your CT and believe Bush didn't care, it's still FAR FAR from being enough for that to happen.

[headhuntersix]

Thats the beauty of a CT..u can never really prove it.

[240 is Back]

Thats the beauty of a CT..u can never really prove it.

wrong.  we have proof - decalssified docs - that say joint chiefs approved plans to false-flag planes and fake attack in miami to stir up war and invade cuba.

we have proof we were never fired on in tonken

[MuscleMcMannus]

Thats the beauty of a CT..u can never really prove it.

So genius what is your excuse for MKUltra?  More conspiracy theory bullshit.  Do you even know what the fuck it is?

[IFBBwannaB]

wrong.  we have proof - decalssified docs - that say joint chiefs approved plans to false-flag planes and fake attack in miami to stir up war and invade cuba.

we have proof we were never fired on in tonken

And when WTC and building 7 were rigged with explosives? It takes more than six weeks to prepare empty buildings so I guess full buildings will take much much longer.

[Hugo Chavez]

And when WTC and building 7 were rigged with explosives? It takes more than six weeks to prepare empty buildings so I guess full buildings will take much much longer.

do you have any clue of what you're talking about

[IFBBwannaB]

do you have any clue of what you're talking about

Apparently more than you, I seem to think it's pretty dubious that they managed to rig all the towers for controlled demolition in 6 weeks with no one noticing.

Shit, I can't understand why you would want it to fall like controlled demolition, I thought the more destruction and fear the better? 

[grab an umbrella]

Apparently more than you, I seem to think it's pretty dubious that they managed to rig all the towers for controlled demolition in 6 weeks with no one noticing.

Shit, I can't understand why you would want it to fall like controlled demolition, I thought the more destruction and fear the better? 

The notion that someone planted thousands of pounds of explosives in these buildings is just stupid.  Believe what you want about the non action of the government, but something like planting explosives is just too much.

[IFBBwannaB]

The notion that someone planted thousands of pounds of explosives in these buildings is just stupid.  Believe what you want about the non action of the government, but something like planting explosives is just too much.

That's what I'm saying.

Not to mention it contradicts the "logic" of the entire CT.

[240 is Back]

The notion that someone planted thousands of pounds of explosives in these buildings is just stupid.  Believe what you want about the non action of the government, but something like planting explosives is just too much.

we're all entitled to our own opinions.

If you believe that fires caused this building to convert from a free-standing, 47-story skyscraper - into powderized concrete and molten steel less than 50 feet tall - in under 7 seconds - that's your right.

Do I believe any building could do this?  No. 
Has it ever happened in history?  No.

Look at it.  It was never mentioned in the 911 Commission report.
Now, I expect you to change the subject.  I'd like to say you believe it's entirely possible that a building, from fires, convert like this (in such a uniform manner) in under 7 seconds.  But I doubt you even believe that. 

[IFBBwannaB]

we're all entitled to our own opinions.

If you believe that fires caused this building to convert from a free-standing, 47-story skyscraper - into powderized concrete and molten steel less than 50 feet tall - in under 7 seconds - that's your right.

Do I believe any building could do this?  No. 
Has it ever happened in history?  No.

Look at it.  It was never mentioned in the 911 Commission report.
Now, I expect you to change the subject.  I'd like to say you believe it's entirely possible that a building, from fires, convert like this (in such a uniform manner) in under 7 seconds.  But I doubt you even believe that. 

Your post reeks of ignorance, you show absolutely no sense of what structural integrity is, shit even human integrity is missing in you too.

[240 is Back]

Your post reeks of ignorance, you show absolutely no sense of what structural integrity is, shit even human integrity is missing in you too.

you have said in the past that you're a structural engineer.

you sound like you're really good at your job.

[IFBBwannaB]

you have said in the past that you're a structural engineer.

you sound like you're really good at your job.

I said I'm an engineer, not a structural engineer.

[240 is Back]

I said I'm an engineer, not a structural engineer.

okay.  have a great sunday.

[Mons Venus]

Your post reeks of ignorance, you show absolutely no sense of what structural integrity is, shit even human integrity is missing in you too.

Owner claimed building was "pulled". Need anymore proof?   Post that video up 240.