Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Post Reply
Page 1 of 3  •  1 2 3 Next
Switch to Forum Live View BushCo tapped pre9/11 plans
10 years ago  ::  Apr 03, 2008 - 3:27PM #1
johndavid23
Posts: 4,325
Mukasky admits BushCo knew about 9/11 beforehand.  From salon.com:

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/04/03/8071/

"prior to 9/11, the Bush administration was aware of a telephone call being made by an Al Qaeda Terrorist from what he called a “safe house in Afghanistan” into the U.S."

This new information contradicts the usual BushCo plea of ignorance.
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Apr 03, 2008 - 3:49PM #2
eadler
Posts: 4,449
[QUOTE=johndavid23;405503]Mukasky admits BushCo knew about 9/11 beforehand.  From salon.com:

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/04/03/8071/

"prior to 9/11, the Bush administration was aware of a telephone call being made by an Al Qaeda Terrorist from what he called a “safe house in Afghanistan” into the U.S."

This new information contradicts the usual BushCo plea of ignorance.[/QUOTE]
What do you mean by the state the Bush knew about 911 beforehand?
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Apr 03, 2008 - 3:57PM #3
acumen
Posts: 1,364
[QUOTE=eadler;405551]What do you mean by the state the Bush knew about 911 beforehand?[/QUOTE]

Trust me, he doesn't know what he means.  More liberal garbage mud-slinging.
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Apr 03, 2008 - 6:09PM #4
looshawn
Posts: 3,006
[QUOTE=johndavid23;405503]Mukasky admits BushCo knew about 9/11 beforehand.  From salon.com:

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/04/03/8071/

"prior to 9/11, the Bush administration was aware of a telephone call being made by an Al Qaeda Terrorist from what he called a “safe house in Afghanistan” into the U.S."

This new information contradicts the usual BushCo plea of ignorance.[/QUOTE]

Okay, isn't there a forum here that you guys can go to just for conspiracies?

If not, why don't you try reading one of the most fact based books about what REALLY happened on 9/11?
The "Debunking 9/11 Myths: An In-Depth Investigation by Popular Mechanics"
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Apr 03, 2008 - 6:28PM #5
johndavid23
Posts: 4,325
eadler,
I said "BushCo", his managers, those who are supposed (according to their responsibilities) to tell him about relevant dangerous situations affecting the US.

loo,
If it was a "conspiracy", then the current Attorney General was aware of it.
Usually, when the attorney general testifies to something happening, it is no longer relegated to the parts of the mind we're trained not to use, no longer automatically (for the brainwashed) dismissed as "conspiracy".
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Apr 03, 2008 - 6:52PM #6
looshawn
Posts: 3,006
[QUOTE=johndavid23;406076]eadler,
I said "BushCo", his managers, those who are supposed (according to their responsibilities) to tell him about relevant dangerous situations affecting the US.

loo,
If it was a "conspiracy", then the current Attorney General was aware of it.
Usually, when the attorney general testifies to something happening, it is no longer relegated to the parts of the mind we're trained not to use, no longer automatically (for the brainwashed) dismissed as "conspiracy".[/QUOTE]

Don't you find it more than a coincidence that over the past years since the 9/11 tragedy, all these theories, including ones similar to the one that you are referring to by salon.com, will be proven as totally debunk? I looked at that link that you provided and it proved to me absolutely nothing - except far left view of "factualism".
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Apr 03, 2008 - 7:13PM #7
MasterOfSparks
Posts: 3,166
I guess those of us who insist on operating in the "reality based" realm really annoy looshawn. But here's a fact that never did get much coverage and damned sure should have:

BEFORE we attacked Iraq then CIA Director George Tenant specifically went on record saying that Iraq was HIGHLY UNLIKELY to present a threat to the US because he knew an attack on us would be suicidal. Nor would Saddam give any weapons to the terrorists because they hated his as much as they hate us since he was the only secular leader in the region and they considered him to be a heretic. They would have as likely used any weapons on Saddam as on the USA. Tenant said there was nothing to worry about UNLESS we attacked Iraq without provocation in which case Saddam may act in SELF DEFENSE. So who do the neocons blame for an ILLEGAL attack on Iraq? George Tenant. Now any way you slice it that's more than a little weird.

Couple that with the fact that a neo-con think tank (Project for a New American Century) featuring key members of the Bush administration went on record (long before they scammed their way back into the White House) spelling out their plans to attack Middle East countries WITHOUT PROVOCATION. They even said that in order to get everything they wanted it might be necessary to have a "Pearl Harbor type event". Google "PNAC Pearl Harbor" for the details.

And if you follow the money who really profited from 9/11? Certainly not Saddam or Iraq. Who made a huge pile of cash off all that? Uh huh. Them.

Now does all this sound like some kind of conspiracy? All I'm doing is giving you a few well documented facts. If that sounds like the basis for a conspiracy its in YOUR mind. Which means its suspicious even to YOU.

The thing I find most irritating about conservatives isn't just that their opinions so rarely have any basis in reality. It's not even their incessant refusal to change those opinions when presented with irrefutable facts and logic. But rather it's their complete bewilderment that anyone else might think they should.

---------------------------------------------------------

There's nothing at all new about the venomous anti-Obama sentiment coming from the right. Its just what happens when an effective and popular Democrat leads the country in a positive direction. Kennedy and Johnson had the John Birch Society. Carter and Clinton had their lunatic detractors. What has changed, however, is that the Birchers and Clinton Death List crowd used to be the extreme fringe and the GOP saw them as an embarrassment. Now the crazies are the top GOP leadership and only a few Republicans are calling for sanity. Why? Because Republicans have no ideas and nothing else to sell.
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Apr 03, 2008 - 8:44PM #8
johndavid23
Posts: 4,325
again, loo,

When the attorney general testifies to prior knowledge of AlQ's plans, the "conspiracy" veil falls.  Now, the question is "how much did BushCo know and when?".  Perhaps another commission will research this.
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Apr 03, 2008 - 8:55PM #9
eadler
Posts: 4,449
[QUOTE=johndavid23;406525]again, loo,

When the attorney general testifies to prior knowledge of AlQ's plans, the "conspiracy" veil falls.  Now, the question is "how much did BushCo know and when?".  Perhaps another commission will research this.[/QUOTE]

He didn't testify to prior knowledge of Al Qaeda's plans. He said there was a phone call that people knew about and could have tapped, but didn't.
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Apr 03, 2008 - 7:13PM #10
MasterOfSparks
Posts: 3,166
I guess those of us who insist on operating in the "reality based" realm really annoy looshawn. But here's a fact that never did get much coverage and damned sure should have:

BEFORE we attacked Iraq then CIA Director George Tenant specifically went on record saying that Iraq was HIGHLY UNLIKELY to present a threat to the US because he knew an attack on us would be suicidal. Nor would Saddam give any weapons to the terrorists because they hated his as much as they hate us since he was the only secular leader in the region and they considered him to be a heretic. They would have as likely used any weapons on Saddam as on the USA. Tenant said there was nothing to worry about UNLESS we attacked Iraq without provocation in which case Saddam may act in SELF DEFENSE. So who do the neocons blame for an ILLEGAL attack on Iraq? George Tenant. Now any way you slice it that's more than a little weird.

Couple that with the fact that a neo-con think tank (Project for a New American Century) featuring key members of the Bush administration went on record (long before they scammed their way back into the White House) spelling out their plans to attack Middle East countries WITHOUT PROVOCATION. They even said that in order to get everything they wanted it might be necessary to have a "Pearl Harbor type event". Google "PNAC Pearl Harbor" for the details.

And if you follow the money who really profited from 9/11? Certainly not Saddam or Iraq. Who made a huge pile of cash off all that? Uh huh. Them.

Now does all this sound like some kind of conspiracy? All I'm doing is giving you a few well documented facts. If that sounds like the basis for a conspiracy its in YOUR mind. Which means its suspicious even to YOU.

The thing I find most irritating about conservatives isn't just that their opinions so rarely have any basis in reality. It's not even their incessant refusal to change those opinions when presented with irrefutable facts and logic. But rather it's their complete bewilderment that anyone else might think they should.

---------------------------------------------------------

There's nothing at all new about the venomous anti-Obama sentiment coming from the right. Its just what happens when an effective and popular Democrat leads the country in a positive direction. Kennedy and Johnson had the John Birch Society. Carter and Clinton had their lunatic detractors. What has changed, however, is that the Birchers and Clinton Death List crowd used to be the extreme fringe and the GOP saw them as an embarrassment. Now the crazies are the top GOP leadership and only a few Republicans are calling for sanity. Why? Because Republicans have no ideas and nothing else to sell.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 3  •  1 2 3 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook