Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Andy Thomas who wrote (469)	4/30/2003 1:55:31 AM
From: Don Earl	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20039

IMO, Flight 93 is the one to concentrate on as far as public information is concerned. About all a person could say with confidence about Flight 77 is it made a funny maneuver before the crash, and too much evidence has been covered up to draw much in the way of conclusions beyond that. If Kaminski is serious about getting the word out, my view is he would appear more credible by focusing less on where the wings went, and more on the host of other issues which are far easier to build a case for. For that matter, it wouldn't surprise me if a back up lie is already in place. For example, if the Bush cartel came out with a claim that the air response was actually effective, and two planes were shot down, the big lie might still slide. Although, that one might have some fallout from the story Flight 93 had been recaptured by passengers. I've run across quite a few cases where 9/11 information has been snuffed by major news channels. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for any serious documentaries.

To: Andy Thomas who wrote (469)	4/30/2003 6:53:40 AM
From: ChrisJP	Respond to of 20039

This guy Kaminski ..... his arguments are pretty lame. In fact the ones he thinks are the most inarguable are the weakest. Don and Ray have posted much more interesting 9/11 anomaly tidbits here. But of course he's working backwards -- the Patriot Act definitely walks the Constitutional line. And of course, the Bush administration's excuses for the urgent need to invade Iraq were pretty lame. So in order for him to connect the dots, he's gotta believe the event that triggered it all was orchestrated too. Everyone's got an agenda, lol. Chris

To: Andy Thomas who wrote (469)	4/30/2003 7:26:35 AM
From: Rock_nj	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

One interesting point that Kaminski raises is: This is really the big one. How could top officials, immediately after the tragedy, say American intelligence had no clue that hijackers would fly planes into buildings and then two days later release the names of the hijackers? This is a clear lie, repeated by almost everyone in the power structure. How could they know the names of the hijackers if they weren't following them and knowing what they were supposedly going to do? The whole story about the hijackers is a complete fabrication, conclusively revealing foreknowledge and casting doubt on the story that the hijackers even boarded the planes. Hmmm. It is kind of odd that our "intelligence" officials immediately knew the identities of the 19 hijackers. You'd think it would take some time to piece that information together if they had no idea who carried out the attacks. That certainly points to some foreknowledge and that the government must of been aware of these men operating in our country.