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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SilentZ who wrote (221848)	3/3/2005 9:20:48 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571967

Z, Because, as I said, I'm not going to get involved in conspiracy theories that end up fingering our leaders in killing 3000 people in one of our own cities on purpose. It's preposterous. Are you a 7 of 9 fan? There was a Voyager episode where she got caught up in the conspiracy theory mentality. Very funny. Tenchusatsu

To: SilentZ who wrote (221848)	3/3/2005 9:24:23 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571967

>Why are you acting so threatened? Call me naive, but I want no part of theories that insinuate that, as much as I dislike our government these days, it had any involvement in killing our own civilians on September 11th, 2001. I'm not even going there... Sorry, Z, but I ain't buying it. First, this is not so much a criticism of the American gov't as it is the Israelis and Mossad. Secondly, its common knowledge that many believe Bush misled us in an effort to get the American public behind the invasion of Iraq. It is it outside the realm of possibility that his administration may have mislead us re. 9/11? There are events surrounding 9/11 which have not been explained to my satisfaction. For an example, who were the people in the white van? This is what's been reported: Israelis. So? There's no evidence they were involved in the attack. Remember, Saddam cheered 9/11 as well, and as we know, he had no involvement, as we point out repeatedly. They found members of Mossad filming the attack. You think they had a camera ready 24/7 just in case something happened to NYC? Is it not more likely they knew something was about to happen and were ready with camera? Besides, Saddam was our enemy; Israel is supposed to be our ally. They were happy, Z. They were happy that the WTC got attacked. That's very sick! Netanyahu's a jerk, too. But a lot of Israelis feel the same way he does, like "when are they going to get it already and side with us?" Its why I tire of Zionists and their BS. Its why I don't trust them any farther than I can throw them. There were American Jews in the WTC and the Israelis don't even care about them. They are a people who have become overly obsessed. I would really like for America to put some distance between us and them. ted

To: SilentZ who wrote (221848)	3/8/2005 1:44:42 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571967

Re: Call me naive, but I want no part of theories Excerpt: (T)he White House suppressed until after the election a damning report that exposes the administration as woefully incompetent if not criminally negligent. z, not only are you naive, but your suggestion that you "want no part" indicates the attitude of a person who is a traitor to the principles set down in the U.S. Constitution. When a criminal cabal has seized the U.S. government as the Bush Crime Cabal clearly has, it is up to the citizenry to take our nation back and to imprison and/or execute the traitors amongst us. There is abundant proof that the Bush criminals were complicit in creating the tragedy of 9/11. Here's another nail in their coffin: latimes.com Robert Scheer: What We Don't Know About 9/11 Hurts Us February 15, 2005 Would George W. Bush have been reelected president if the public understood how much responsibility his administration bears for allowing the 9/11 attacks to succeed? The answer is unknowable and, at this date, moot. Yet it was appalling to learn last week that the White House suppressed until after the election a damning report that exposes the administration as woefully incompetent if not criminally negligent. Belatedly declassified excerpts from still-secret sections of the 9/11 commission report, which focus on the failure of the Federal Aviation Administration to heed multiple warnings that Al Qaeda terrorists were planning to hijack planes as suicide weapons, make clear that this tragedy could have been avoided. For the last three years, administration apologists have tried to make the FAA the scapegoat for the 9/11 attacks. But it is the president who ultimately is responsible for national security, not a defanged agency that is beholden to the industry it allegedly monitors. The terrible fact is that the administration took none of the steps that would have put the protection of human life ahead of a diverse set of economic and political interests, which included not offending our friends the Saudis and not hurting the share prices of airline corporations. The warnings provided by intelligence agencies to the FAA were far clearer and more specific than suggested by Condoleezza Rice's testimony before the 9/11 commission when she reluctantly conceded the existence of a presidential briefing that warned of impending Al Qaeda attacks. Rice had dismissed those warnings as "historical," but according to the newly released section of the 9/11 report, an astonishing 52 of the 105 daily intelligence briefings received by the FAA — and available to Rice — before the Sept. 11 attacks made specific reference to Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. Given this shocking record of indifference on the part of the administration, it is politically understandable that it tried to prevent the formation of the 9/11 commission in the first place, and then for five months prevented the declassification of key sections of the final report. Commission members, including its Republican chairman, Thomas Kean, stated in the past that there was no national security concern that justified keeping those sections of the report from the public. And let's be clear: The failure to fully disclose what is known about the 9/11 tragedy is not some minor bureaucratic transgression. Not since the Soviets first detonated an atomic bomb more than half a century ago has a single event so affected decision-making in this country, yet the main questions as to how and why it happened remain mostly unanswered. Even worse, what we do know calls into question our government's explanation that a diabolical international terrorist conspiracy exploited our liberal, naive society. What has emerged, instead, is a portrait of an often bumbling terrorist gang allowed to wreak havoc because the top tiers of the administration were so indifferent to the alarms, which former CIA Director George Tenet described so graphically: "The system was blinking red." Had the business-friendly administration put safety first and ordered a full complement of air marshals into the air, over the obscene objections of airlines loath to give up paid seats, nearly 3,000 people might not have died that day. And had the president of the United States taken some time from his epic ranch vacation that August to order a nationwide airport alert, two bloody wars abroad, as well as an all-out assault on civil liberties in this country, probably would not have happened. Instead, an administration that resisted spending the tens of millions required to fortify airline security before 9/11 is nearing the $300-billion mark on Afghanistan and Iraq. And declassified documents have unmistakably said the latter had nothing to do with 9/11. Meanwhile, those countries that at least indirectly did, most notably "allies" Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, have been let off the hook. Indeed, the 9/11 commission was not allowed to get near that story: It is an unnoticed but startling truth that the basic narrative on the tragedy derives from the interrogations of key detainees whom the 9/11 commissioners were not allowed to interview. Nor were they permitted to even take testimony from the U.S. intelligence personnel who interrogated those prisoners. When the truth and governmental transparency are arbitrarily trumped by the invocation of national security, the public is simply incapable of making informed decisions on the most crucial decisions we face — starting with whom we elect as our commander in chief.