Bush supporters' aftermath thread

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:

I tend to agree, but we need to be careful.

How have conservatives behave when Liberals were running the country?

Point well made Finn. By my estimation; conservatives behave just about as badly minus the absurd conspiracy theories American liberals tend to buy into in far greater numbers. This may just be the liberal's natural tendency to oppose "the man" manifesting itself.
If there's any truth in "It was said that it takes nine positives to wipe out a single negative in the public consciousness", and I think there is; the constant negative campaigning strategies may very well be nothing more than an unfortunate side effect of a capitalist society when you consider the enormous costs of campaign advertising. Even with the obscene size of today's political war chests on the way to office, the bean counters have little choice but to go after the most bang for their buck. After all, it is the American way.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Magginkat wrote:
OCCOM BILL wrote:
Bin Ladin has been at war with us for over a decade. We with him for almost 5 years. Our lack of knowledge of real targets is the only thing that's held our aggression in check these last few years. Since he's repeatedly reminded us that conditions haven't changed and is still promising more destruction; I don't think it reasonable to suggest that attacking him would be pre-emptive or put us in the business of aggression rather than defense (not in that theatre anyway).

Strange.... I haven't even heard king george say that "Bin Laden has been at war with us"

And how could "we" be at war with one man?

We are not at war at all. It's nothing more than an illegal police action.

Instead of going after the people who committed a criminal act, bombing the WTC, etc., "we" allowed a moron to lie us into this illegal invasion of two small countries and have murdered thousands of innocent people in the process.

Of course it's going to be tricky going after the man or men responsible for 9-11 since they have done such a snow job on their little sheep that few dare to suggest that bu$h, Cheney, Rummy, etc., are responsible for 9-11.

You should share this insight with your pyschologist. He may be able to help you more than we can.

Magginkat is largely correct...except perhaps in the last sentence. We do not know yet if Bushco is responsible for (deliberately failing to prevent) 9-11 but we do know that they used the disaster to assist them in their crimes.
Otherwise imo Magginkat is right on ther money.

0 Replies

McTag wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
Magginkat wrote:
OCCOM BILL wrote:
Bin Ladin has been at war with us for over a decade. We with him for almost 5 years. Our lack of knowledge of real targets is the only thing that's held our aggression in check these last few years. Since he's repeatedly reminded us that conditions haven't changed and is still promising more destruction; I don't think it reasonable to suggest that attacking him would be pre-emptive or put us in the business of aggression rather than defense (not in that theatre anyway).

Strange.... I haven't even heard king george say that "Bin Laden has been at war with us"

And how could "we" be at war with one man?

We are not at war at all. It's nothing more than an illegal police action.

Instead of going after the people who committed a criminal act, bombing the WTC, etc., "we" allowed a moron to lie us into this illegal invasion of two small countries and have murdered thousands of innocent people in the process.

Of course it's going to be tricky going after the man or men responsible for 9-11 since they have done such a snow job on their little sheep that few dare to suggest that bu$h, Cheney, Rummy, etc., are responsible for 9-11.

You should share this insight with your pyschologist. He may be able to help you more than we can.

Magginkat is largely correct...except perhaps in the last sentence. We do not know yet if Bushco is responsible for (deliberately failing to prevent) 9-11 but we do know that they used the disaster to assist them in their crimes.
Otherwise imo Magginkat is right on ther money.

Thanks McTag.

Actually there is much to suggest that this was an inside job but I have no desire to get into a long drawn out argument with those in this group who are blind to every criminal thing that has pulled off by Bu$h & Thugs, Inc.

The major questions remain: Who ordered NORAD planes to stand down and why? Why did bu$h fight so hard to prevent any kind of investigation into this crime?

Why should bu$h or anyone occupying the oval office have the authority to prevent or stall an investigation into a criminal act?

0 Replies

(Yawn)

0 Replies

I was at Walmart yesterday and saw a bumper sticker that said "bombs blew up the World Trade center" I was saddened to think that we have such ignorant people in our society. Especially considering all the free education available.

It's a shame really.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

I was at Walmart yesterday and saw a bumper sticker that said "bombs blew up the World Trade center" I was saddened to think that we have such ignorant people in our society. Especially considering all the free education available.

It's a shame really.

A bigger shame is those who question nothing.

I assume that you consider yourself to the one of the smart but sad people? Then how about telling us why not one single intercept plane flew even though there were multiple 'hijacked' planes flying?

Why did bu$h block any kind of investigation until months later?

Where are the indestructable black boxes.... at least one of them?

What is Operation Northwoods?

Even someone who is as dumb as dirt should be able to answer that last one.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

I was at Walmart yesterday and saw a bumper sticker that said "bombs blew up the World Trade center" I was saddened to think that we have such ignorant people in our society. Especially considering all the free education available.

Perhaps Wal-Mart was running a sale on AFDBs.

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
I was at Walmart yesterday and saw a bumper sticker that said "bombs blew up the World Trade center" I was saddened to think that we have such ignorant people in our society. Especially considering all the free education available.

Perhaps Wal-Mart was running a sale on AFDBs.

I doubt it......... especially since it seems rather obvious that you and McG have purchased all of them.

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
I was at Walmart yesterday and saw a bumper sticker that said "bombs blew up the World Trade center" I was saddened to think that we have such ignorant people in our society. Especially considering all the free education available.

Perhaps Wal-Mart was running a sale on AFDBs.

0 Replies

A picture is worth a thousand words...........

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v737/Magginkat/BushMcCainIHateYourUglyAss.jpg

0 Replies

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v737/Magginkat/kickbackmtn.jpg

0 Replies

Quote:

Then how about telling us why not one single intercept plane flew even though there were multiple 'hijacked' planes flying?

Only a complete idiot believes that the USAF could have done anything.
The nearest base that had planes able to intercept those jets is a reserve base.
They did NOT have pilots on standby,they did not have a CAP flying,nothing.
They would have had to call pilots in from their civilian jobs,get the planes armed,get them up in the air,then find the hijacked planes.

And only an idiot wonders why those planes werent shot down.
If it had been a normal hijacking,and those planes had been downed,then the left would be screaming bloody murder that it wasnt neccessary to kill those people.

Either way,bush cant win.
But,when you look at who I quoted,it makes my case.

0 Replies

mysteryman wrote:

If it had been a normal hijacking,and those planes had been downed,then the left would be screaming bloody murder that it wasnt neccessary to kill those people.

Not just the left.

0 Replies

Yes. In your wildest dreams can you imagine the hue and cry that would have reverberated across the land if the US military deliberately shot down a passenger liner full of people? Especially without knowing the intent of those who controlled it?

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Yes. In your wildest dreams can you imagine the hue and cry that would have reverberated across the land if the US military deliberately shot down a passenger liner full of people? Especially without knowing the intent of those who controlled it?

I did not say one word about shooting down any planes. Every year dozens of planes are intercepted that have flown into restricted air space. I have never heard of one of them being shot down.

The question remains...... who ordered the interceptor planes to stand down? Not just one hijacked plane but 4 !

.

0 Replies

Magginkat wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
Yes. In your wildest dreams can you imagine the hue and cry that would have reverberated across the land if the US military deliberately shot down a passenger liner full of people? Especially without knowing the intent of those who controlled it?

I did not say one word about shooting down any planes. Every year dozens of planes are intercepted that have flown into restricted air space. I have never heard of one of them being shot down.

The question remains...... who ordered the interceptor planes to stand down? Not just one hijacked plane but 4 !

.

Nobody ordered any planes to stand down.
From CNN,I found this timeline...

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.hijack.warning/

--7:59 a.m.: American Airlines flight 11 takes off from Boston's Logan International Airport.

--8:14 a.m.: United Airlines flight 175 takes off from Boston's Logan International Airport.

--8:20 a.m.: American Airlines flight 11 stops transmitting IFF beacon signal while over the Hudson River.

--8:20 a.m.: American Airlines flight 77 departs Dulles International Airport near Washington.

--8:38 a.m.: Boston air traffic center notifies NORAD that American Airlines flight 11 has been hijacked.

--8:43 a.m.: FAA notifies NORAD that United Airlines flight 175 has been hijacked.

--8:44 a.m.: Otis Air National Guard Base in Mass. orders to fighters scrambled.

--8:46 a.m.: American Airlines flight 11 strikes the World Trade Center's north tower.

--8:47 a.m.: NORAD informed of the plane striking the World Trade Center.

--8:50 a.m.: United Airlines flight 175 deviates from its assigned flight path.

--8:52 a.m.: Two F-15 Eagles take off from Otis ANG Base in effort to intercept hijacked plane(s) after first plane has struck the World Trade Center.

--9:02 a.m.: United Airlines flight 175 strikes the World Trade Center's south tower (F-15 fighter jets from Otis ANG Base are still 70 miles away.)

--9:25 a.m.: FAA notifies NORAD that United flight 77 may have been hijacked.

--9:27 a.m.: (approximate time) NORAD orders jets scrambled from Langley Air Force Base in Virginia to head to intercept United Airlines flight 77.

--9:35 a.m.: Three F-16 Fighting Falcons take off from Langley AFB headed toward Washington area.

--9:37 a.m.: American Airlines flight 77 is lost from radar screens.

--9:38 a.m.: American Airlines flight 77 strikes the Pentagon.

--9:49 a.m.: F-16 fighter jets arrive over Washington, D.C. to perform Combat Air Patrol (CAP) over city. (The fighters broke the sound barrier and traveled supersonic at 720 knots to Washington, making the approximately 130 miles in 14 minutes.)

The following timeline is for United Airlines flight 93, scheduled to fly from Newark International Airport to San Francisco. The flight crashed in Pennsylvania.

--8:42 a.m.: United Airlines flight 93 takes off from Newark International Airport.

--9:16 a.m.: FAA informs NORAD that United Airlines flight 93 may have been hijacked.

--9:40 a.m.: Transponder signal from United flight 93 ceases and radar contact is lost.

--10:02 a.m.: After a review of radar tapes, a radar signal is detected near Shanksville, Pennsylvania.

Notice that 5 minutes after Norad got the warning,they orderd fighters into the air.
Two minutes later the first plane hit the WTC.
There is no way that they could have found,identified,and intercepted a plane in 2 minutes.

If you look at the timeline,you can see that no rational person can say honestly that the AF should have been able to do anything.

0 Replies

The operative word here is 'rational' MM. Don't expect your correct information to even be read, much less accepted. Sometimes rational is too much to expect from some who have chosen to believe some of the idiotic stuff that is made up and posted on the internet.

0 Replies

Fox.... one hardly has to make up anything with bu$h in office. He can string out those lies better than anyone else in recent memory.

If you will do a little research you will find that the intercept planes are usually in the air in a matter of minutes... not an hour or more.

Those pilots are on constant standby and are trained to be off the ground in ten minutes or less. If they took an hour they would be grounded until hell freezes over. The only way they were not flying was because of a direct order from someone in the highest offices in this land to stand down.

0 Replies

Mags,you directly ignored the timeline.
THe first fighters were in the air 5 minutes after Norad was notified.

Where are you getting that it took an hour?

0 Replies

Bush supporters' aftermath thread

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know