So it's an authority based thing huh? I didn't know information subscribed to authority. I thought information was just information. Pardon me if I don't recognize your authority to distort and mislead. I had assumed the team leader was someone else. My apologies.
Sorry, but you do not get to do that. trhe burden of proof is not on the normal rational people who accept the official narrative, but on the snipers who present absurd, knee slapping, laughing-until-you-pass-out implausible counter-claims. Substantiate one of yours and you might get the respect of an adult.
The position that is more reasonable and has more supporting evidence should be accepted as true. Hurling insults is not considered evidence.
The burden is on us all, truth is our only way to go forward and anyone who believes that The Powers that Be tell us the truth has never read a History book of any worth. “I should like to say two things, one intellectual and one moral. The intellectual thing I should want to say is this: When you are studying any matter, or considering any philosophy, ask yourself only what are the facts and what is the truth that the facts bear out. Never let yourself be diverted either by what you wish to believe, or by what you think would have beneficent social effects if it were believed. But look only, and solely, at what are the facts. That is the intellectual thing that I should wish to say.'' Bertrand Russell
September 11, 2001 is just one day though. What are your thoughts about all of the days prior to attacks, and, as well, the days following the attacks? Specifically, I want to add, prior to the attacks, the warnings received, the Presidential Briefs, the failed efforts in apprehending/killing bin Laden/confronting al Qaeda, etc. So, don't be shy. Share your thoughts.
Would you expand on this train-of-thought? Like, do you mean implementing "A Clean Break", or the Global War on Terrorism? What specifically do you mean by: "the way the administration exploited the event"?
Beforehand there was a horrible dereliction of communication between camps, as well as deadly (it proved) arrogance on the part of several administrations. Afterward there was lots of CYA and fingerpointing. Politics out of control. My main concern in this particular forum is the technical aspects of the attack and its results. I am fascinated by the 'truthers' mad claims of therm*te and space weapons, as well as their accusation of everyone they consider was 'in on it'.
And with your aforementioned distrust in government, which you've never really expanded on in great detail, you find none of that suspicious? Do you have any lingering doubts? If so, about what? 9/11/01 is well and away locked-down, in most regards, in my mind. It is the before-and-after that is most perplexing, and of which, in my opinion, deserves the most scrutiny and analyzation. Do you agree or disagree?
I doubt all people in power. Their secondary job is in covering their collective ass. I find the lack of communication between camps disgusting, but not 'suspicious'. I see it every day among friends, companies I work for and even family. The before has been researched. I'm fairly satisfied with the findings. Should new information emerge, my mind is not closed to changing. The after deserves more scrutiny. I'm at a loss as to why the 'opposing team' hasn't done so, either as a legal mater or simply in a campaign. I have spoken to my representatives about it at length.
Lack of communication amongst us "heinous civilians" is one thing, expected certainly, but amongst government employees, it is inexcusable. Not unheard of, but inexcusable nonetheless. I don't need to explain why they need to communicate amongst each other. There are several things I find suspicious. The lack of overall effort to confront bin Laden and al-Qaeda prior to 9/11. That is huge. Bullets should most definitely have been flying. I mean, after that Summer '98 threat of flying bomb filled planes into the WTC, CIA paramilitary teams in any other normal setting would be excommunicating mother(*)(*)(*)(*)ers for threatening to harm and kill America and American citizens. It only makes sense since the CIA Director did say the CIA was at War with bin Laden. The before has not been fully researched by civilian eyes, not yet. For example, you are aware that there were 40 Presidential Daily Briefs delivered to President Bush about the bin Laden/al-Qaeda threat before 9/11, correct? Only one of those has seen the light of day to my knowledge. So the other 39, we have to take on account from other governmental representatives that they said nothing 'worthwhile'. I mean, notwithstanding, that there were 40 PDB dealing with that specific threat in that short of a time-frame, and there was no gung-ho response. I presume you're talking about Iraq?
Common sense should dictate what's reasonable and what is not. I agree hurling insults and ridiculing evidence is not considered evidence either but the team here does it as a matter of routine. I guess when the "official" BS story lacks details and jumps to broad conclusions, that's when the ridicule is supposed to be inserted ("officially" speaking, of course).
Agreed. And that went back for at least two administrations. See my note about 'arrogance'. I mean our leadership's. You lay the whole incident in Bush's lap. I would spread it back much further than his few months in office. As much as bin Laden and his group liked to boast and threaten, I'm quite surprised there were only 40. He was not the only boogie man out there, just (as it turns out) the most determined. See my note about 'if new evidence/ information comes to light'. And Afghanistan and the US and the Patriot Act and several others.
Supporting sites and posters that proclaim 'no one died on 9/11' and heralding them as 'fountains of free flowing truth' is not common sense.
I've retracted and explained that which you insist on regurgitating (for obvious reasons). I understand it serves the agenda better though to keep beating the dead horse, and highlighting that which perpetuates the agenda. Fell free to continue the pattern though and I'll continue to point it out. Thanks again boss.
While the suggestion that you didn't take the time to think things through certainly does explain that situation, I think it may apply in a more broad sense as well...
