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: sea_urchin who wrote (9943)	2/14/2005 8:26:23 PM
From: LPS5	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

I know I'm sounding a bit like Mr e here, for which I apologize[.] Hey! What's wrong with being skeptical? :-) e

To: sea_urchin who wrote (9943)	2/14/2005 9:17:06 PM
From: Don Earl	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20039

RE: "Operatives were at the airports, flight control centers, NORAD, those who placed the explosives for the demolition and then set them off. Then there's media control -- how the mainline media studiously avoided mentioning anything which might be embarrassing to the government. The obfuscation at the FBI. The 9-11 Commission." Airport security was handled by an Israeli company, which makes it no more complicated than slipping in a few Mossad back op guys to take care of what's needed. The same goes for the WTC, and the Israeli company that moved out of the building 10 days before the attacks. As far as the "obfuscation at the FBI" is concerned, once again, PNAC guys were giving the orders. Not to mention that there were whistle blowers and that those whistle blowers are under gag orders by the same PNAC guys. The media reports what the media is told to report. That many reporters were out of the loop is evidenced by the amount of information that slipped through the cracks. The 9/11 Commission? Let's do be serious. Every person on it was hand picked by Bush and towed the line straight across the board on the resulting cover up. RE: "could you please tell me exactly who did 9-11?" I know PNAC was behind 9/11, with help from Mossad, the same way I know 2 + 2 = 4. The evidence proves it. There isn't any other answer possible for anyone who bothers to do the math. When a policeman arrests a burglary suspect, whose finger prints were left at the scene of the crime, with the stolen goods in the trunk of the suspect's car, the policeman "knows" the suspect is guilty. You can split rabbits and claim it is only a matter of opinion at that stage of the game, but I wish you the best of luck if you happen to be the burglar and expect the cop to hold off on pressing charges based on that assumption. The PNAC boys left their finger prints all over 9/11 and they have been stuffing their trunks with the booty ever since. I feel sorry for anyone who has spent several years looking at the evidence and is still disinclined to press charges.

To: sea_urchin who wrote (9943)	2/15/2005 3:44:00 AM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

Hi Searle, Re: I accept "connecting dots" may be a function of intelligence but it is not evidence. Actually, in American jurisprudence, "connecting dots" is frequently accepted as evidence. The common moniker for such evidence is "circumstantial evidence". Many famous (and many more not-so-famous) cases have been decided on this basis alone.

To: sea_urchin who wrote (9943)	2/15/2005 4:49:05 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

Re: It's possible for 19 hopelessly incompetent Arabs to pull it off You may well ask how most Americans believe that one? But they do -- and that's a fact. I'm afraid it's more complicated than that... Granted, a sizable segment of public opinion did buy the official bunk hook, line and sinker. Yet another section --mostly the educated middle class-- doesn't believe the official theory so much as it represses any dissenting conspiracy. Repression, in the psychological sense, is of the essence --much as in the case of a cuckolded husband... US opinion, somehow, is the cuckold who is married to the US government. Of course, he "knows" that his wife has an affair with somebody... yet, he can't prove it --only circumstancial clues prompted him to suspect his wife's infidelity. But then, he just represses the whole thing, even tough a faint little voice in the back of his brains keep nudging him into facing the truth. However, it'd be much too painful, too messy to confront his wife... If only because she owns the house... and the money. What's best --or worst: be a cuckold living off his wife's money or a bankrupt, middle-aged divorcé slumming it in a trailer? Americans have already answered. Gus