Well said, Ron. Hey- some people just aren't happy with their lives, so I guess they have to blame someone... I'm making a permanent return to ww2. This conspiracy crap is just plain ridiculous...
Ron, I just skim through these posts to see if there's any mention of a specific issue. It's funny how you enjoy digging into the details of what happened during WWII, but, when it comes to modern events, all you can do is blather on in generalities. To illustrate my POV, I have put such historical events as Iran-Contra, The Liberty Incident, Tonkin Gulf, Pearl Harbor on the table for discussion, but, you guys avoid talking about that at all costs. Always the same: criticize the government and you're "unpatriotic." Suggest the perhaps the government was not acting in the best interests of the people and you're a "conspiracy theorist." *YAWN* Between you, Crazy, and Andreas, you have cited one--ONE--source to support your arguments (such as they are) which was that ridiculous Terrorist-Info site. I mean... where do you people get your news? Do you look into current events beyond what you see on TV? I posted a forum: 9-11 Timeline which is nothing but sources. Of course, the three of you avoid THAT forum like the plague, because it would require some investigation on your part. It's a lot easier calling people "Jackass" and hiding behind the flag.
Well to keep things civil here...first off i would have taken "jackass" out of that msg if i was able to moderate then. (i just got the privilege a few days ago) I am sorry that that insulted you and it was wrong. In fact i can try and find it and get rid of it. I don't read about the other conspiracies simply because i don't have any knowledge about the events and thus don't feel qualified to comment and also don't have the time or want to read into them. I did read/skim the pearl harbor link you gave and believe a lot of the information is simply looked at too deeply or exaggerated. Like you're looking too hard for something wrong. Any inconsistancy is nothing but intentional. I basically trust the sources you provide as much as you belive sources like USAToday. However personally i feel you blame the government for too much and don't give it enough credit. I'll have my opinions and you'll have yours. I'm sick of bickering to be honest. My own opinion in regards to Roosevelt knowing all this...i feel that he did know an attack was coming...somewhere...and so did the military. Many important details were not reported and they were not all Roosevelts mistakes. They were spread out all through the military ranks. I feel that the US felt the Japanese were going to attack but in no way would they be daring or smart enough to hit Pearl Harbor. I believe 12/7th happened because a lot of people made mistakes and over looked certain things, or simply made the wrong assumptions. I don't believe the US let it happen. But you know...i'll belive what i'll believe and you'll believe your idea. No harm in differences of opinion. I just take things personally when people blame the federal government for so much. When i know the vast majority of the people are doing their best to do good for the country. It's almost like i feel you're not appreciative. but hey we all can have opinions. end
Knight- remedial English 101. might help you. Ron, and all, I apologize for my language. [ 23 September 2002, 11:50 PM: Message edited by: CrazyD88 ]
Ron Spot on with FDR. It was a major US intelligence failure with faults all along the chain of command. Whit no overall co-ordinating structure for US intelligence FDR was expected to be his own intelligence assessor, assuming that he was shown everything (he wasn't. The best illustration of this is the Army and Navy decoded Jap signals on alternate days and possibly shared their findings with each other. Insane. Although those keen to blame Kimmel and Short point to the war warning they were issued prior to 7/12, this pointed to Japanese action against the Dutch and British, not Pearl. Moving to 9/11 the similarities are strong: poor intelligence co-ordination, competing agencies jealous of their sources and timid managers. Jumbo
Hardly surprising in a country that has hundreds of government agencies nobody knows what they are doing. Intelligence and security agencies alone would be: CIA, FBI, DIA, NRO, NSA, Secret Service and I'm probably missing a few already. How is that supposed to work together??
Learning to read, Knight... Find my "argument" on 9/11... Find where I used the phrase "unpatriotic" Demonstrate somewhere where I "hide behind the flag". among others...
Andreas, I'd say "nobody knows what they're doing" is a bit harsh... But Jumbo states it pretty well. This seems to have happened a few times, Pearl Harbor, 9/11... I'm sure there are others. We can easily see that many of these agencies need FAR more cooperation. I haven't really been keeping up, but I've read bits about what is coming out in the (now public) congressional hearings on 9/11. And I get the idea that much of the information about the kind of threat we were facing was available, it just seems that no-one put it together. In defense of some of the US's intelligence mis-steps, I think the lack of any precendent played a part. Although we have been attacked in the past-Pearl Harbor being the best example here- 9/11 was really new. Pearl Harbor- there was already a major war going on, and the US was a major nation that was already slowly becoming involved. It seems that there was something of a feeling that US involvement was inevitable- we were already involved in lend lease. Thus, while the Japanese attack was a suprise and a shock to many, it was a part of a larger war, and thus seemed maybe to at least make sense. But 9/11- there was really no precedent for a terrorist attack of that scale. And we have never really been "at war" with any of the middle eastern factions, at least not on a major scale. Clinton's antics had distracted many Americans away form the fact that Al-Quaeda was a threat. Thus, to an extent, I'd say many of these "agencies" had become complacent. This is (obviously) inexcusable... it's just my take on the intelligence failures.
Crazy I don't think that Clinton distracted the US public in a deliberate fashion. He did fire Cruise missiles at Sudan and pressurise the Sudanese to expel Al Quaeda, successfully it turns out. Besides I thought the Republicans wanted to distract the US people with Clinton's antics: he'd rather that they happily ignored them! Jumbo
Certainly, Jumbo. Clinton obviously had other things on his mind... and under his desk. Must say, I'd have trouble thinking about... never mind that one. I don't think it was deliberate. I think in general, the US intel agencies (and people in general) just got too complacent- something like the 9/11 attacks just wasn't on most people's radar, if you know what I mean. Even after the attack- we saw many Americans who say it seemed "like something out of a movie". Although I'd imagine that you would agree that said cruise missile attack was really a relatively weak measure.
FEMA Team Sent to NY on 9-10? RealAudio recording of a statement made by FEMA spokesman Tom Kenney to Dan Rather, reportedly on Wednesday, September 12th. In this interview, Tom states that Fema was deployed to New York on Monday night, September 10th, to be ready to go into action on Tuesday morning, September 11th. Needless to say, this recording has caused quite a stir. Mr. Kenney has since been ordered not to discuss this incident. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fematape.html
www.whatreallyhappened.com Wow... and imagine, only the right-wing news sites mention this "Tom Kenney" thing. Damn liberal conspiracy... I bet every source for that timeline talks about this though... And considering the "author's thoughts and conclusions" for the timeline Knight posted... "There's no such thing as a truly objective news source; everyone has a point of view consciously or subconsciously. As much as I've tried to keep my point of view out of this, the very act of choosing some articles to include and others to leave out is very subjective. So what's my take on all of this? I believe the Bush Administration is guilty of one of the greatest crimes in history. They were either 1) criminally negligent and deserve impeachment, or 2) had foreknowledge of 9/11 and did nothing to stop it, or 3) actively manipulated events to make sure 9/11 happened just the way they wanted it." ... I think we just have to acknowledge that this is really the most reliable source out there. Good work, Knight.
Crazy: Again, no mention of anything specific. No indication that you read any of the material. Just a rush to find the author's point-of-view so you can condemn him for being too conservative, too liberal, too moderate... (if only he had NO point-of-view, like you...) You expect material to be ENTIRELY correct--well, it hardly ever is. You have to work at picking out the truth. And, as far as the timeline goes, NORAD has a pretty poor explanation of events--as indicated by a multitude of sources.
And such a reliable bunch of sources they are... www.fromthewilderness.com first headline from that site... Center for an informed america... whose homepage prominently displays a photographic comparison between LA riot police and Nazis in 1937... www.whatreallyhappened.com Again, this site tells us what really happened. How could one argue with that? And of course I had to leave room for the fourth source this author cites... I mean, how could one ever cast doubt on Mad Cow Productions? And don't worry, gents, all the other reliable sources are there... The Propaganda Matrix, the World Socialist Website, The Emperor Wears no Clothes, September 11: No Surprise, etc. To many great sources to name... I am a bit suprised though... the author cites The Jeff Rense Program, but then goes on to mention Not sure what he means by "out there"... I'm sure this is another reliable one... Luckily, the author stays well clear of anything like the CIA, NSA, FBI, WorldNews, A.P., Reuters, or anything like that. Wouldn't want any of those sources clouding up our views...
Whoa... remember that Public Enemy song from the 80s, "911 is a Joke"? My lord... Public Enemy knew about this all the way back in the 80s... Is Crazy just talking crazy, or does this conspiracy go even deeper than any of us imagined? I bet Eminem is one of the ringleaders... slim shady... bin Laden... the plot thickens... [ 24 September 2002, 02:02 PM: Message edited by: CrazyD88 ]
I've been trying to stay out but lol with those sources...how come MINE was so unrealiable! www.terrorismfiles.org oh well
Well They are specialized...but it could be better organized... CIA= counter intelligence reports and taking part in real time counter intelligence missions inorder to create the reports. NSA=Primary work in Cryptology (I think CIA and NSA should be combined) DIA(i think you meant DEA)=Enforces Federal drug laws foreign and domestic. FBI=Investigates all crimes in which federal law was violated. (The FBI will run investigations in all counter terrorism crimes...or terrism that already happened. The CIA does not investigate any crimes...It measures the threat, foreign or demestic, to the US) (interchange of info is what they are trying to work on now [FBI and CIA]) That sounds bad but i think it is better to have seperate agencies focusing on primary missions...rather than one doing everything. I think the US is too big for something like that. HOWEVER, i will tell what is ridiculous! The policing system here! listen to this...it is almost comical! Say someone commited an armed robery in my town of Plainfield. Lets see who has jurisdiction of the investigation. Well: Plainfield Police Dept, Union County Police Dept, New Jersey State Police, and the FBI! Now that is ridiculous! However what usually happens is the agency that has the most elevated jurisdiction...in this case the FBI, (bank robberies are a federal crime) would take the case out of the hands of the others...but there would still be some working together. But if someone doesn't take charge...which does depend on the personalities of the investogators...then a real mess could ensue...like information from the Plainfield police would be withheld from the FBI cause they found it or info found by the state police would be withheld until they get a more active role int he case. It could be a real mess! Another funny thing is everyone wants SWAT teams! Towns frequently have SWAT teams if they can afford it...the County may have one...the state definitely has one...and the FBI and other investigative federal agencies will have them too! That in my mind needs to be fixed first! YIKES
What the hell does SWAT stand for anyway? And what is it technically? I have a vague idea of course, but based on movies and computer games it doesn't strike me as very reliable. On sources: All the websites you mentioned contain some truth. Some more, some less. If there was no truth in it at all probably nobody would believe these pages anyway. But the sites do not mention a whole lot more, and this gives a very slanted view - and that is the intent of course.
