Obama's second term

[Scorpius]

Obama doesn't need a third term, he's just a puppet for the lizard people.

You weren't supposed to know this! *shakes scaly fist*

 

[FortyTwo]

You know, wars occur within a president's second, third or fourth years also. That's the beauty of the conspiracy theorist's mind - picking and choosing to *discover* perceived patterns and ignoring everything else.

I can go outside on a clear night and connect the dots among stars to spell out "The Illuminati are coming! The Illuminati are coming!" Proof positive that it's been writ in the stars since the beginning of time.

I agree with you in principle but I've known this about the stars and the Illuminati for several years now, so there's no need to deny/mock it.

 

[rainforests1]

Are you implying that the US had no counter-terrorist operations before 9/11?

As far as I know Bush did nothing to prevent the attacks from happening. That's all I'm saying.

 

[das_nut]

As far as I know Bush did nothing to prevent the attacks from happening. That's all I'm saying.

Odd. I seem to remember actions taken against AQ well before 9/11, such as "Operation Infinite Reach", which admittedly was under Clinton, but counter-terrorism operations did continue under Bush.

 

[FortyTwo]

As far as I know Bush did nothing to prevent the attacks from happening. That's all I'm saying.

I think Bush is an idiot and I'm not defending him, but how was anyone supposed to predict that?

 

[rainforests1]

I think Bush is an idiot and I'm not defending him, but how was anyone supposed to predict that?

Maybe because there were documents in early August saying terrorists were going to use airplanes in terrorist attacks. They had at least one month to do something. Of course the documents may have been fake and it may have been an inside job. We'll never know.

 

[rainforests1]

Odd. I seem to remember actions taken against AQ well before 9/11, such as "Operation Infinite Reach", which admittedly was under Clinton, but counter-terrorism operations did continue under Bush.

I think you're referring to the bombing of the Sudan pharmaceutical factory which is believed to have caused tens of thousands of civilian deaths. Great counter-terrorism operation. I'm referring to after they had read about the documents about a terrorist attack using airplanes in early August. If there were counter-terrorism operations in August or early September, they clearly weren't successful.

 

[FortyTwo]

Maybe because there were documents in early August saying terrorists were going to use airplanes in terrorist attacks. They had at least one month to do something. Of course the documents may have been fake and it may have been an inside job. We'll never know.

No. I am sick and tired of seeing all this 9/11 "truth" crap.

What happened that day was an organized act of terrorism based on the conservative religious views of a group of radicals. Not an "inside job".

Maybe Bush did what he could, maybe he didn't. Either way he's a moron, that doesn't change anything.

It's incredibly disrespectful to the people who died that day to mull over it and come up with conspiracy theories about this or that government being involved, and it's a slippery slope. I've literally seen people who say that 9/11 was caused by the U.S. Federal Government in order to mask an invasion of aliens who will partner with the Illuminati and raise the AntiChrist.

 

[das_nut]

I think you're referring to the bombing of the Sudan pharmaceutical factory which is believed to have caused tens of thousands of civilian deaths. Great counter-terrorism operation. I'm referring to after they had read about the documents about a terrorist attack using airplanes in early August. If there were counter-terrorism operations in August or early September, they clearly weren't successful.

You're criticizing the government for not acting on vague knowledge (in regards to 9/11), and you're also criticizing the government for acting on vague knowledge (Operation Infinite Reach) and getting things wrong.

So tell me, what do you want? If the government gets a vague report, should it act swiftly with military force, or should it not? If the government does not act swiftly, you'll accuse it of being engaged in a conspiracy. If it does act swiftly, odds are that it'll get things wrong, and then you'll condemn it for civilian deaths.

 

[rainforests1]

So tell me, what do you want?

1.If there is a terror threat within the United States do something about it.
2.Don't get involved with other countries' affairs. This includes going into holy sites in Saudi Arabia as we did in the Persian Gulf war. Maybe other people would like us more this way and threats of terrorism would be reduced.
3.Reduce our immigration down to almost nothing. Terrorists would have a hard time coming into this country.

 

[Spang]

3.Reduce our immigration down to almost nothing. Terrorists would have a hard time coming into this country.

Most terrorists were born in the United States -- the ones who commit terrorist acts in the U.S., that is. The ones who are a far greater threat to Americans than any foreign-born terrorist.

 

[das_nut]

1.If there is a terror threat within the United States do something about it.
2.Don't get involved with other countries' affairs. This includes going into holy sites in Saudi Arabia as we did in the Persian Gulf war. Maybe other people would like us more this way and threats of terrorism would be reduced.
3.Reduce our immigration down to almost nothing. Terrorists would have a hard time coming into this country.

1. Do what? Ground all air traffic? Prevent all travel? Such a solution would work, but the effects on the US economy would be devastating. (And after terrorists discovered that, all they would need to do is keep leaking "threats" using various means to continue to shut down various modes of travel in the US.)
2. I thought you wanted to "do something" about terrorism. I guess by "doing something" you don't mean actually targetting terrorists outside of the US.
3. Well, in regards to 9/11, how would that have prevented the 9/11 hijackers? A quick google search turns up the 9/11 hijackers using tourist, business and student visas. So your solution wouldn't prevent 9/11. (And if you blocked all travel to/from the US, you're back to severe economic ramifications, by the way.) It also wouldn't have prevented the second most deadly American attack carried out on US soil, the OKC bombing.

 

[yakherder]

Presidents are little more than symbols who take credit for the good and take the fall for the bad. We're going to war regardless of what he does or doesn't do. There are just too many entities that want and benefit from it. Doesn't matter what the president wants because he's outgunned.

If you don't want war, stop supporting organizations that benefit from it. Your vote comes from your wallet, not in a booth. But if you want it, that's fine too. Keeps me employed.

 

[rainforests1]

1. Do what? Ground all air traffic? Prevent all travel? Such a solution would work, but the effects on the US economy would be devastating. (And after terrorists discovered that, all they would need to do is keep leaking "threats" using various means to continue to shut down various modes of travel in the US.)
2. I thought you wanted to "do something" about terrorism. I guess by "doing something" you don't mean actually targetting terrorists outside of the US.
3. Well, in regards to 9/11, how would that have prevented the 9/11 hijackers? A quick google search turns up the 9/11 hijackers using tourist, business and student visas. So your solution wouldn't prevent 9/11. (And if you blocked all travel to/from the US, you're back to severe economic ramifications, by the way.) It also wouldn't have prevented the second most deadly American attack carried out on US soil, the OKC bombing.

1.Somehow later that night they already were telling people who the 19 hijackers were. Assuming the government claims are true they must have known who the hijackers were prior to the attack. Maybe arrest them prior to the attacks. At the very least you give a warning, and people flying in airplanes would have been more alert to what may happen.
2.Terrorists generally don't pose a threat to this country unless they're in it. I'm a big believer in a neutral foreign policy. You make less enemies this way.
3.I think McVeigh was influenced by Ruby Ridge and Waco. Still goes back to government policies I don't promote. At some point the United States will have to cut its amount of immigrants or there will be a crisis. I'd prefer we prepared for that a long time ago rather than a crisis happening. Animals are much better off with a smaller human population as well. Terrorists entered the United States from foreign countries so of course different rules would have prevented them from coming.

 

[Sevenseas]

We're going to war regardless of what he does or doesn't do. There are just too many entities that want and benefit from it. Doesn't matter what the president wants because he's outgunned.

This.

 

[das_nut]

1.Somehow later that night they already were telling people who the 19 hijackers were.

1. When someone hijacks a plane, the list of suspects is pretty short, and correlates with the passenger list in most cases. Narrowing it down further was possible by the crews on several flights giving description of the hijackers. But you are making one mistake - all the 19 hijackers were not identified that night - at least, not by any source I can find. I personally remember some confusion over the hijackers identities.

2.Terrorists generally don't pose a threat to this country unless they're in it. I'm a big believer in a neutral foreign policy. You make less enemies this way.

While a neutral foreign policy has a lot of things going for it, a truly neutral foreign policy does have its problems.

3.I think McVeigh was influenced by Ruby Ridge and Waco. Still goes back to government policies I don't promote.

I think both Ruby Ridge and Waco was handled very poorly. But unless you don't want the government investigating claims of illegal weapons or rape of 12 year olds, you are always going to have the possibility of a situation being handled wrong.

I doubt you "don't promote" the government investigating and arresting people for sex with children.

At some point the United States will have to cut its amount of immigrants or there will be a crisis. I'd prefer we prepared for that a long time ago rather than a crisis happening.

This is just nativist crap. It crops up now and again in American history. This time its the Mexicans* or Middle Eastern people. Before that it was the Chinese. Before that it was the Germans. Before that it was the Irish, or the French. I'm pretty sure the US has survived Irish, French, German, and Chinese immigration.

Heck, the US has thrived on immigrants, with their skills, willingness to work, and knowledge. Here's a short list of famous Americans who were immigrants:

• Madeleine Albright (secretary of state)
• John Muir (naturalist)
• Joseph Pulitzer (of "Pulitzer Prize" fame)
• Subranhmanyan Chandrasekhar (the "Chandrasekhar limit" is named after him, if you've studied physics)
• David Ho (AIDS treatment)
• Albert Einstein
• Andrew Carnegie (businessman)
• Enrico Fermi (nuclear physics)
• Nikola Tesla (electricity)
• Sergey Brin (co-founder of google)
• Jerry Yang (Yahoo)
• Amar Bose (Bose speakers)
• Levi Strauss (Levi jeans)
• Bjarne Stroustrup (programming)
• John Kenneth Galbraith (economist)
• Andrew Grove (Intel)

The list can go on and on.

Animals are much better off with a smaller human population as well.

But it's not a smaller human population. People have to live somewhere. If they don't live in the US, they'll live somewhere else.

* Why are all hispanics considered "Mexican"?

 

[rainforests1]

Immigration up to a certain point is okay. When your population continues to rise and your population becomes unsustainable, it's time it should start dropping. We're far past that point. Most immigrants who come into the United States eat more meat than they would in their own countries. It causes more suffering.

If this was a surprise terrorist attack the government wouldn't know a single terrorist who was involved that night. They'd know when the bodies were found. Descriptions would help narrow it down, but it certainly wouldn't give the answers. Even surveillance footage(the footage we're not being shown) wouldn't give conclusive answers. If they could already give the names of even a few of the hijackers that night, it's probably because they were aware of them prior to the attacks. Something should have been done.

 

[FortyTwo]

Immigration up to a certain point is okay. When your population continues to rise and your population becomes unsustainable, it's time it should start dropping. We're far past that point. Most immigrants who come into the United States eat more meat than they would in their own countries. It causes more suffering.

If this was a surprise terrorist attack the government wouldn't know a single terrorist who was involved that night. They'd know when the bodies were found. Descriptions would help narrow it down, but it certainly wouldn't give the answers. Even surveillance footage(the footage we're not being shown) wouldn't give conclusive answers. If they could already give the names of even a few of the hijackers that night, it's probably because they were aware of them prior to the attacks. Something should have been done.

You've either never been on a plane or you didn't pay attention on one because the airline system is VERY meticulous.

I don't think it would have taken a genius to discover that Muslim radicals were behind the attack, and it'd be easy to trace from the passenger lists.

I'm not saying that nothing could have been done, but acting like the government had some magical secret intel that would have made everything better is a terrible and unrealistic way to think.

 

[Dave in MPLS]

911 Myths debunks quite a bit of the conspiracy stuff, in greater detail than I have the patience for. Enjoy.

it'd be easy to trace from the passenger lists

Which is (surprise, surprise!) exactly what happened, apparently.

 

[das_nut]

Immigration up to a certain point is okay. When your population continues to rise and your population becomes unsustainable, it's time it should start dropping. We're far past that point. Most immigrants who come into the United States eat more meat than they would in their own countries. It causes more suffering.

Sounds like an argument for decreasing meat consumption in the US, and not an argument for decreasing immigration.

If this was a surprise terrorist attack the government wouldn't know a single terrorist who was involved that night. They'd know when the bodies were found. Descriptions would help narrow it down, but it certainly wouldn't give the answers. Even surveillance footage(the footage we're not being shown) wouldn't give conclusive answers. If they could already give the names of even a few of the hijackers that night, it's probably because they were aware of them prior to the attacks. Something should have been done.

Using Dave in MPLS's link:

Ong said the four hijackers had come from first-class seats: 2A, 2B, 9A, and 9B. She said the wounded passenger was in seat 10B. - Source.​

2 of those identified (9A and 9B) were passengers, not hijackers. The "wounded passenger" was actually a hijacker. The other two were hijackers. But it gets easier:

A few minutes later, another airline worker (Nydia Gonzalez) on the plane identified the occupant of 9B (a falsely identified hijacker) as a passenger, and (correctly) identified a hijacker as an occupant of seat 10B.​

- Source.

Yet another airline worker also reported the seat numbers of hijackers:

Calmly, she gave him the seat locations of three of the hijackers: 9D, 9G and 10B. She said they were all of Middle Eastern descent, and one spoke English very well.​

- Source

This was somewhat incorrect. 9D and 9G were empty. But 8D and 8G were not, and were the location of the hijackers.

Some of the same details were used in multiple reservations - for example, the same credit card was used to buy several tickets, the same contact phone number was also used on several reservations.

So tell me, how long do you think it should take the FBI to pull up airline reservations from the four hijacked flights, check the seat numbers from flight #11, verify who would be likely to be of Middle Eastern descent on the flight, and then check if the same credit card or phone number was used for other reservations on the hijacked flights?