I'm beginning to suspect that bushco did 9-11

i dunno, just something about all that's gone down since the stolen election. some sort of a pattern i sense in my head somewhere, the bushco Modus Operendi. a sneaking suspicion, after weighing all the evil that they are capable of. if you can order the geneva convention away, and turn midwestern plowboys into nazi monsters, and kill 25,000 people with no one to stop you, you are capable of any evil.

if you can support sharon, and condemn saddam, sell the world weapons of mass destruction, and act as if no one can have them, if you can invade a country and occupy it, and subjugate it's people, you can do damn near any evil.

any evil.

from the first moment it happened - I always have been and will be convinced of LIHOP or MIHOP - it was their only avenue to pursue the PNAC Agenda and we will never be able to prove it. We are living in dark times indeed and no one knows where it will lead. I believe they are planning other 9-11's right now - it's the only way they can control what looks like an America that has finally opened its eyes.

would help * at all. I know there is the possibility of Martial Law being enacted but aside from that, all of the talk about "we are safer now" would be shown for the scam it is. If another 9-11 happened on his watch, I think it would *definately* spell the end of the Bu$h misadministration.

In which they found that in the case of another attack, the numbers look 50 Bush - 39 Kerry.

Of course, it's hypothetical until it happens, and no one can really know -- but that's what they found.

I don't understand why you would vote for a man who promised to make America safer and then demonstrably failed at the task. As he would if a second attack happened.

Vote for him, hell no, blame him.

n/t

has pretty much complied with the plan for the PNAC. Very scary. Have you read John Dean's book, "Worse Than Watergate" ?

Who stood down NORAD?

serious about finding out what all went wrong so it can be fixed?

warren commission 2004

that hit me about a year ago. when I realized they were going to invade a country and kill thousands of people and possibly even thousands of our OWN people, in order to steal this country that had never attacked us, was never a threat to us, and that they were blatantly LYING about.

It was then I realized they had absolutely no respect for human life and were willing to do anything in order to achieve their "political" ends.

They knew they were lying about Iraq. They knew thousands would die. They did it anyway.

9/11 is a pretty small crime compared to that.

Plus they never would have been able to do anything they wanted if it weren't for 9/11. The realization that they were the only ones who benefitted.

PLUS (last but certainly not least) all the covering up about 9/11 and the fact that everything they say about 9/11 STINKS TO HIGH HEAVEN.

You've thought that for a long time. :-)

Seriously, I think it's a heartbreaking conclusion, but as Bartcop says, why would you trust evil people with unlimited power NOT to create 9/11?

who benefits from the crime?

We don't need to speculate beyond that, because it's a fact. Whatever they do, they have a justification or a rationalization for it, which is why they never attempt to even fake one iota of accepting responsibility for their actions.

It's always been this way, people being sacrificed by the thousands so that TPTB can hold onto their power. And the gullible masses allow it. Sickening.

In 2001, after the SC appointed him president, with poppy's old political advisers and poppy's old staffers, Shrub decided that the past 8 years didn't happen. The cold war had just ended, now the major threat to the world was Iraq, and that bastard that tried to kill poppy. To shrubco, al Qaeda didn't exist. The 93 WTC bombing was the work of Iraqi intelligence officers. Cheney and Wolfowitz were obsessed with Iraq. Rice was, at best, dubious about al Qaeda. The Cole bombing was the work of Egyptian Islamic Jihad, never mind that EIJ had already merged with al Qaeda. Yes, according to shrubco, the year was really 1993, not 2001. The CIA and NSC staff left over from the Clinton administration pleaded with them to pay attention to al Qaeda, but to shrubco, it was just an offshoot of the Taliban, not a threat. According to Richard Clark, one NSC staffer said "do they need an al Qaeda attack on the pentagon before they pay attention?" As we all know now, that is exactly what needed to happen. Even then, shrubco tried to tie Iraq to the attacks. Getting rid of Saddam Hussein was shrubco's only mission after the attempted assassination. Pres. Clinton's missile strike was not good enough. Poppy wanted Saddam's head on a plate, and Shrub was gonna give it to him.

My opinion...9/11 COULD have been stopped...and it SHOULD have been stopped.

Shrubco just didn't give a damn about it because Saddam wasn't involved.

I waffle between believing they were so distracted by what they wanted that they just weren't paying attention, or that they deliberately let down their gaurd and opened avenues for some major attack, knowing it would come and they could get their ways.

If they planned it, I think it was along the lines of interrupting the chain of command of al-Queda (or whatever subgroup). Bush could insert a plant in that chain of command, so that the people below believe the order came from the top, whereas the top would not know about it.

I don't believe that last scenario, it's just more feasible, and makes more sense, than Bush hiring the CIA or some other American group to pull it off. Why do more work and run more risk than you have to? Why frame someone when they are eager to do the crime, anyway?

BushCo clearly had the plans for invading Afghanistan and Iraq laid out, and clearly used 9-11 to enact those plans. That doesn't have to mean they planned 9-11. They may have just used what was at hand.

But then I think about the passport in the "rubble" of the WTC, where bodies were completely obliterated, or the letter found in the suitcase at the Pennsylvania crash right after they said that no piece of debris was bigger than a breadbox. And the "Air Force One" lie, and the various stories Bush tells about how he learned of the first attack... They were lying about the evidence, for sure. But they lie so reflexively, who knows why?

They left the goal wide open for the slapshot...That's my thinking. That approach gives them the cover of the incompetence defense and plausible deniability.

*snicker*

"Before his 2000 campaign, Bush confided to a leader of the religious
right: "I feel like God wants me to run for president ... I sense my country is going to need me. Something is going to happen."

"SOMETHING IS GOING TO HAPPEN"??!! And this was BEFORE the 2000 campaign?? Well, if something is going to happen, and God wants you to be President to handle it, you can "justify" all the lies and crimes and dirty campaigning to make sure you "win".

This article is at http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4928237-103550,00.html

It's mostly about Gen. Boykin--some real stunning info about him too. But at the bottom, this quotation--with no date, just sort of tossed off. Personally, I think it's really important.

So are we to believe * is clairvoyant? or prophetic? Or maybe he knows that plans are in the works? Or has the plans in his pocket?

This is not a general it's-a-dangerous-world-out-there kind of remark. It's more like a warning, or a threat.

:scared:


edited to include proper link (it takes longer on dial-up)

I can't remember the exact quote, but I'd love it if somebody could provide it again. I want to bookmark it.

He basically said something like "something really bad is going to happen soon"