SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (288360)5/17/2006 5:25:29 PM
From: combjelly  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1571200
 
"Would Gore even have invaded Afghanistan after 9/11?"

Probably. Since that was where Al Qaeda was.

"Would Saddam still be in power, getting money from the "Oil for Palaces" program?"

Probably. Since that wasn't where Al Qaeda was. Nation building was something we weren't supposed to do. Remember that? There are plenty of strongman governments around the world and there really wasn't anything, other than oil, that elevated Iraq over much of the African continent.

"Would Gore have gotten us out of the recession, or would he have prolonged it by raising taxes?"

Probably. Managing recessions isn't rocket science you know. We tend to have them pretty regularly and raising taxes generally isn't part of the formula.



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (288360)5/17/2006 5:55:32 PM
From: TigerPaw  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1571200
 
Would Gore even have invaded Afghanistan after 9/11?

He would have gone after Al Qaeda.
It's debatable whether going after the Taliban was necessary or if they would have given up Bin Laden. That's even assuming there was a 9/11 since Al Gore didn't need a New Pearl Harbor event to push his agenda.

Saddam would still be in a box.

Gore wouldn't have aggrivated any recession with massive deficits.

Even if there were some mistakes, they couldn't possibly be worse than the ones we have already experienced in the last 5 years.

TP



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (288360)5/17/2006 6:23:32 PM
From: Road Walker  Respond to of 1571200
 
re: Would Gore even have invaded Afghanistan after 9/11?

Would Saddam still be in power, getting money from the "Oil for Palaces" program?

Would Gore have gotten us out of the recession, or would he have prolonged it by raising taxes?


Yes, yes and yes. And he probably would have reduced our dependence on oil.

More important are the things he wouldn't have done.



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (288360)5/17/2006 10:53:39 PM
From: American Spirit  Respond to of 1571200
 
Even Ralph Nader would have invaded Afghanistan after 9-11, but no one but Bush-cheney would have invaded Iraq, especially the way they did it, unilaterally and without any proper planning or foresight.

The real question is whether Gore would have picked up the phone after receiving the 8-6-01 warning. Judging from past actions like when they were warned about the 1999 LAX bombing, the answer is definitely yes. Therefore, 9-11 might never have happened. As you know, Bush and Rice did nothing.



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (288360)5/20/2006 5:38:39 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1571200
 
Kevin Barrett: Media hide truth: 9/11 was inside job

By Kevin Barrett
Last Saturday, former Bush administration official Morgan Reynolds drew an enthusiastic capacity crowd to the Wisconsin Historical Society auditorium. It is probably the first time in Historical Society history that a political talk has drawn a full house on a Saturday afternoon at the beginning of final exams.

Reynolds, the former director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis, and the ex-top economist for George W. Bush's Labor Department, charged the Bush administration with gross malfeasance, and proposed the prosecution of top administration officials.

Normally, if a prestigious UW alumnus and ex-Bush administration official were to come to the Wisconsin Historical Society to spill the beans about a Bush administration scandal, it would make the news. The local TV stations would cover it, and it would merit front page headlines in The Capital Times and Wisconsin State Journal.

Reynolds' indictment of the administration he worked for was a stunning, life-changing event for many of those who witnessed it. As the event's organizer, I have received dozens of e-mails about it from people who were deeply affected.

Despite the prestigious speaker and venue, and the gravity of the charges aired, for most Americans indeed most Madisonians the event never happened. Why? Because it was censored, subjected to a total media blackout. Not a word in the State Journal. Not a word in The Capital Times. Not a word on the local TV news. Not a word on local radio news. And, of course, not a word in the national media.

Why the blackout? Because Reynolds violated the ultimate U.S. media taboo. He charges the Bush administration with orchestrating the 9/11 attacks as a pretext for launching a preplanned "long war" in the Middle East, rolling back our civil liberties, and massively increasing military spending.

When a former Bush administration insider makes such charges, how can the media ignore them? Is Reynolds a lone crank? Hardly. A long list of prominent Americans have spoken out for 9/11 truth: Rev. William Sloane Coffin, Sen. Barbara Boxer, former head of the Star Wars program Col. Robert Bowman, ex-Reagan administration economics guru Paul Craig Roberts, progressive Jewish author-activist Rabbi Michael Lerner, former CIA official Ray McGovern, author-essayist Gore Vidal, and many other respected names from across the political spectrum have gone on the record for 9/11 truth.

Are the media ignoring all these people, and dozens more like them, because there is no evidence to support their charges? Hardly. Overwhelming evidence, from the obvious air defense stand-down, to the nonprotection of the president in Florida, to the blatant controlled demolition of World Trade Center building 7, proves that 9/11 was an inside job. As noted philosopher-theologian and 9/11 revisionist historian David Griffin writes: "It is already possible to know, beyond a reasonable doubt, one very important thing: the destruction of the World Trade Center was an inside job, orchestrated by terrorists within our own government."

A growing list of scientists has lined up behind BYU physicist Steven Jones and MIT engineer Jeff King in support of Griffin's position, as evidenced by the growth of Scholars for 9/11 Truth (st911.org) and Scientific Professionals Investigating 9/11 (physics911.net).

As a Watergate-era graduate of the University of Wisconsin School of Journalism, I was taught that exposing government lies and corruption is the supreme duty of the Fourth Estate. I simply cannot fathom the current situation. I do not understand the 9/11 truth blackout. I wish someone would explain it to me.

It is time to break the 9/11 truth blackout. Please put pressure on your local media through letters to the editor, call-ins to talk radio, and phone calls to local and national journalists.

And come see Peter Phillips, director of the media watchdog group Project Censored, who will lead a strategy session on breaking the blackout at the upcoming international 9/11 truth conference in Chicago: 9/11: Revealing the Truth, Reclaiming Our Future, to be held June 2-4 at the Embassy Suites Hotel, Chicago-O'Hare Rosemont. Go to 911revealingthetruth.org for more information.

The event will feature presentations from dozens of 9/11 truth luminaries, from scientists like Steven Jones to intelligence agency whistle-blowers like David Shayler, and promises to be a historic, watershed event. Be there, or resign yourself to a future of endless war, lost liberty, and a craven media that cannot bring itself to breathe a single word of truth.

Kevin Barrett of Madison is a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth (st911.org) and SPINE: Scientific Professionals Investigating 9/11 (911physics.net) and serves as coordinator of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth (mujca.com). E-mail: Kevin@mujca.com

Published: May 12, 2006

madison.com