Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Luke Rudkowski confronts Dick Cheney


  • Please log in to reply
189 replies to this topic

#181    flyingswan

flyingswan

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,778 posts
  • Joined:13 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 24 April 2011 - 10:54 AM

View PostLittle Fish, on 15 March 2011 - 03:41 PM, said:

who, other than Mineta, reports the "do the orders still stand" conversation?
Came across this, with the conversation attributed to the Flight 93 alarm by Josh Bolten:
KING: That was the plane that slammed the Pentagon. Then, a report of a plane over Pennsylvania headed for Washington. Twice, a military aide asks the vice president for authority to shoot it down.

JOSH BOLTEN, DEPUTY WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: The vice president said, yes, again. And the aide then asked a third time. He said, "just confirming, sir, authority to engage." And the vice president, his voice got a little annoyed then, said, "I said yes."

http://transcripts.c...9/14/cp.00.html

"Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true" - Francis Bacon (1561-1626)
In which case it is fortunate that:
"Science is the best defense against believing what we want to" - Ian Stewart (1945- )

#182    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 26 April 2011 - 12:49 AM

View Postflyingswan, on 24 April 2011 - 10:54 AM, said:

Came across this, with the conversation attributed to the Flight 93 alarm by Josh Bolten:
KING: That was the plane that slammed the Pentagon. Then, a report of a plane over Pennsylvania headed for Washington. Twice, a military aide asks the vice president for authority to shoot it down.

JOSH BOLTEN, DEPUTY WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: The vice president said, yes, again. And the aide then asked a third time. He said, "just confirming, sir, authority to engage." And the vice president, his voice got a little annoyed then, said, "I said yes."

http://transcripts.c...9/14/cp.00.html
What does this prove?

That Josh Bolten witnessed an aide asking for authority to engage UA93?? No one is doubting that!! lol

The aide never asks Cheney if the order still stands according to Bolten, he asks for authority to engage and Cheney never says to the aide according to Bolten "Have you heard anything to the contrary?" as Mineta over hears.

2 different conversations which you are desperately trying to equate as the same which clearly aren't.

Edited by Stundie, 26 April 2011 - 12:50 AM.

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#183    turbonium

turbonium

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,265 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2005

Posted 07 May 2011 - 12:54 PM

View Postflyingswan, on 14 April 2011 - 07:53 PM, said:

Mineta says he understood the "orders still stand" to refer to a shoot-down order, which seems reasonable in the circumstances.  What do you want it to mean?

I don't "want" it to mean anything, but I do want Cheney held accountable for it.

Btw, I guess you really must "want" it to mean a reasonable comment, no matter how obvious to see that nothing about it is reasonable.

The plane was tracked from (at very least) a distance of 50 miles from the Pentagon. The building's underground bunker is an ideal '9/11 hiding spot' for Cheney, Mineta, and the "young man".  

Cheney gets at least 2 more updates on "the plane". The "orders still stand", but Cheney still refuses to explain the purpose of those orders.

No way does this plane fit in with the official story. Among all the planes flying within a 50-mile radius of the Pentagon, they manage to pick out this one specific plane, and know immediately it is a hijacled plane, and that its target is the Pentagon. So from 50 miles out, start tracking this deadly aircraft (now referred to as "the plane") with regular updates Cheney received in the bunker.

A hijacked plane, heading directly toward the Pentagon. How nice of Cheney not to warn the Pentagon that a plane was just about to pulverize them!! :rolleyes:

So, is this still a "reasonable" explanation to you?


#184    flyingswan

flyingswan

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,778 posts
  • Joined:13 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 14 May 2011 - 01:47 PM

View Postturbonium, on 07 May 2011 - 12:54 PM, said:

Cheney gets at least 2 more updates on "the plane". The "orders still stand", but Cheney still refuses to explain the purpose of those orders.
It seems all the witnesses, even Mineta, knew what the orders were.

Quote

No way does this plane fit in with the official story. Among all the planes flying within a 50-mile radius of the Pentagon, they manage to pick out this one specific plane, and know immediately it is a hijacled plane, and that its target is the Pentagon. So from 50 miles out, start tracking this deadly aircraft (now referred to as "the plane") with regular updates Cheney received in the bunker.
If you'd bothered to read this thread before posting, you'd know that my position is that the reported conversation took place after the orders to ground air traffic, so any remaining incoming aircraft was violating those orders.  In addition, the aircraft concerned (Flight 93) had issued a "Mayday", altered course for Washington and turned off its radar transponder.  Hardly a difficult guess that it had been hijacked.

Your objections to the logic of the story only apply to the conspiracist alternative timeline in which the incoming aircraft is Flight 77.

Quote

A hijacked plane, heading directly toward the Pentagon. How nice of Cheney not to warn the Pentagon that a plane was just about to pulverize them!! :rolleyes:
I should be the one rolling my eyes.  How exactly is anyone going to work out where in the Washington area an aircraft 50 miles away is aimed at?

"Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true" - Francis Bacon (1561-1626)
In which case it is fortunate that:
"Science is the best defense against believing what we want to" - Ian Stewart (1945- )

#185    _Colonel_

_Colonel_

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Joined:26 May 2011

Posted 26 May 2011 - 04:04 AM

View PostStundie, on 20 February 2011 - 05:32 PM, said:

If you want evidence that Dick Cheney was in the PEOC before 9:58am, perhaps 10:00, then all you have to do is look at his interview with Tim Russert he gave on the 16th Sept 2001.

He claims he is in the PEOC with Mineta and Rice when he hears of the Pentagon attack. i.e. before 9:58 unless we are to believe that the VP didn't know about the attack on the Pentagon until 20 minutes after the attack and almost 10 minutes after it was confirmed on the news.


This is NOT what Cheney says in the Russert interview. Read it here.

Cheney most clearly say in that interview that he:

Quote

1. spoke to the President by phone before he left his office for the PEOC
2. spoke to the President AGAIN in the corridor outside of the PEOC
3. was grabbed by the SS as a direct result of the detection of Flight 77
4. makes reference to 77 hitting the Pentagon before he is inside of the PEOC

Stundie's response to that - Cheney is lying. Never mind the idea that Stundie apparently feels like Cheney was lying all over the place in that interview, but for some reason decided to tell the truth at a point that seems convenient for Stundie's fantasy.

Stundie interprets this lone phrase from that interview:

Quote

I had Norm Mineta... I had Condi Rice with me and several of my key staff people....But when I arrived there within a short order, we had word the Pentagon's been hit.

Stundie thinks that phrase indicates that 77 crashed AFTER Cheney entered the PEOC despite the other comments by Cheney about it in the same interview.

In another interview, Rice indicates she learned of the Pentagon crash before she goes to the PEOC. Stundie's response to that - Rice is lying.

Cheney made no such claim that Stundie says. Stundie does not understand the past perfect tense of the English language.


#186    flyingswan

flyingswan

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,778 posts
  • Joined:13 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 26 May 2011 - 11:01 AM

View Post_Colonel_, on 26 May 2011 - 04:04 AM, said:

Stundie does not understand the past perfect tense of the English language.
Maybe Stundie isn't a native English speaker.  I gave up arguing with him because, apart from the stream of insults, he seems completely incapable of understanding the points I make.

"Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true" - Francis Bacon (1561-1626)
In which case it is fortunate that:
"Science is the best defense against believing what we want to" - Ian Stewart (1945- )

#187    _Colonel_

_Colonel_

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Joined:26 May 2011

Posted 27 May 2011 - 03:01 AM

View Postflyingswan, on 26 May 2011 - 11:01 AM, said:

Maybe Stundie isn't a native English speaker.  


English is his first language. He just never excelled in it. I can't believe after all of these years he is still pushing this Mineta nonsense.


#188    turbonium

turbonium

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,265 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2005

Posted 28 May 2011 - 08:59 AM

View Postflyingswan, on 14 May 2011 - 01:47 PM, said:

I should be the one rolling my eyes.  How exactly is anyone going to work out where in the Washington area an aircraft 50 miles away is aimed at?

Sure. Who would ever consider the White House to be any more likely a target than...hmm..a WalMart, or a 7/11?  

Who really needs a rolling eyes emoticon to see how this is pure nonsense?


#189    flyingswan

flyingswan

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,778 posts
  • Joined:13 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 28 May 2011 - 02:22 PM

View Postturbonium, on 28 May 2011 - 08:59 AM, said:

Sure. Who would ever consider the White House to be any more likely a target than...hmm..a WalMart, or a 7/11?  

Who really needs a rolling eyes emoticon to see how this is pure nonsense?
Quite, you were claiming before that it was definitely aimed at the Pentagon, so how come the White House is now the obvious target?

"Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true" - Francis Bacon (1561-1626)
In which case it is fortunate that:
"Science is the best defense against believing what we want to" - Ian Stewart (1945- )

#190    flyingswan

flyingswan

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,778 posts
  • Joined:13 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 03 June 2011 - 07:31 PM

Oh dear, it seems that Luke Rudkowski and "We Are Change" have parted company.  Something to do with a cover-up of financial irregularities.  Not the sort of behaviour one would expect from those dedicated to exposing Truth:

http://redactednews....ter-we-are.html

"Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true" - Francis Bacon (1561-1626)
In which case it is fortunate that:
"Science is the best defense against believing what we want to" - Ian Stewart (1945- )




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users