Flashermac Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 Here is the [color:red]guaranteed truth[/color]: The truth the whole truth and everything but the truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.. Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 I love how the righties apologize and make excuses for Bush (who, let's not forget, let the worst terror act on American soil happen on his watch AND let the perpetrator go scott-free) and still blame Clinton for everything. Man that Clinton is one bad ass mo-fo, being able to fuck shit up seven years outta office 5555555555555 Can you say "cognitive dissonance" children? I thought you could... Don't worry mate, *someone* has gotta be in that hardcore 32% 55555555555 (although Jimmy Carter had higher numbers *even* during the hostage crisis). Regards, SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.. Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 Frash, you never cease to amaze with your links. Hysterically funny shit! Cheers, SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khun_Kong Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 cognitive dissonance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.. Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 That's what I said Haveing speeling issshoes this week... Cheers, SD -- but don't confustigate me with Nervous Dog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torneyboy Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 He is good ..imo We don't get much of his work down here anymore for some reason.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuck6660 Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 OH, Are you saying that YOU think the US Government intentionally allowed Islamic terrorist to attack NYC, the Pentagon and presumably (or they already knew that the passengers would thwart the attack) the White House? If you really believe the absurd conspiracy theories. Then you may have been in "Baghdad by the sea" for too long! There is little doubt that pre-9/11 the uS intelligence services were on their collective asses! The evidence was there, yet no one put 2+2 together. An absolute failure...YES. Intentional...NO. As for Bush's Iraq boondoggle...total failure? Probably! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 "...There is little doubt that pre-9/11 the uS intelligence services were on their collective asses! The evidence was there, yet no one put 2+2 together. An absolute failure...YES. Intentional...NO..." The only part that would disturb me is the part where Bush talked about needing "...another Pearl Harbor..." or where people talk about needing "...another terrorist attack to get the American people convinced more action is needed to go into Iran..." when the main culprits were predominately Saudi. As to whether or not they allowed it to happen, at this point, nothing would surprise me. Look at the Kennedy assassination, after all this time, we know we were lied to about that. All evidence suggests it was not one man from one building, so why would it surprise you if we were lied to about 9/11? I know the lies they told us about El Salvador, so I simply refuse to believe all they tell us, is as they tell us about this war. Call it/me what you want, I will not blindly buy anything they tell us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.. Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 Are you saying that YOU think the US Government intentionally allowed Islamic terrorist to attack NYC, the Pentagon and presumably (or they already knew that the passengers would thwart the attack) the White House? Is there any difference between intentionally allowing something to happen and total incompetence? Not usually in the eyes of the law. Both are punishable. And you certainly are quick to blame Clinton for terror attacks, so you should at least be consistent. I firmly believe that the Flight 93 passenger take over was just propaganda -- that aircraft was splashed by one of the scrambled fighters. And while I'd not want to be the guy ordering it or the pilot executing that order, it was 100% the right move in the situation. But for some reason the gummint does not want to say so. Regards, SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuck6660 Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 Is there any difference between intentionally allowing something to happen and total incompetence? Not usually in the eyes of the law. Both are punishable. And you certainly are quick to blame Clinton for terror attacks, so you should at least be consistent. I firmly believe that the Flight 93 passenger take over was just propaganda -- that aircraft was splashed by one of the scrambled fighters. And while I'd not want to be the guy ordering it or the pilot executing that order, it was 100% the right move in the situation. But for some reason the gummint does not want to say so. Regards, SD SD, In this instance there is a BIG difference, between the US government being complicit in the attack; and being incompetent in putting the intel reports together, to predict an event beyond most peoples imagination. I do not appreciate the attempt to dilute my qoute, making it appear I have a hidden agenda. I have never, ever stated that Clinton was responsible for any terrorist attack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.