I fail to understand how you are open to this, but yet go and lump the American people into allowing this to happen with the government. It's the government's job to gather this information and prevent such things from happening. The average American has absoulutely nothing to do with preventing such an attack, yet you go and act like everyone of us should be held equally accountable for what the government allowed to occur.

The government knew of plans terrorits had to hijack planes and fly them into the Twin Towers months before the attack occurred. They did nothing to prevent it from happening. They in fact, turned away from the warning signs knowing full well an attack was going to take place in America by a terrorist organization.

Consider those facts, combined with PNAC's statements of needing a "Pearl Harbour" type of event to occur in order to gain support for this war in Iraq, and it isn't that difficult to see what their thoughts were in allowing 9/11 to take place.

Not only that, but after it happened, they lied to us and said they had no idea terrorists would think to hijack planes and use them as missiles.

It amazes me how even those that understand this refuse to criticize the government for these criminal actions.

I don't think you get the import of what I said at all.

You, as well as just about everyone else in America, were fat and happy and lazy and complacent. You talk as if the government isn't a reflection of the populus. They ARE. We put them there, and if they neglected anything, it's because we all neglected the same things.

Back in the Apollo days, we had a terrible tragedy. A fire occurred in 1967...three men died in a fire inside a spacecraft. It was the result not necessarily of complacency and being fat and happy, but of go-fever. A similar scenario, indeed, because it blined us to the obvious danger that we all should've known about, but we never thought about.

We were responsible for the deaths of three fine men on a dark January evening. But no one said...the government is responsible for this. They planned this...they're evil.

You know what, we accepted that we were responsible, we woke up, and the result of that awakening was that 2 1/2 years later, we accomplished the goal. No one blamed anyone else. The problems, the paradigm, the insanity was recognized by those responsible for it and it was corrected. No one blamed anyone else for it. Thus, success resulted. We learned from what we had done.

That's called being human.

Today, we don't seem to be able to get it though our heads that we all, collectively, as Americans, allowed this thing to happen. We did. I have no problem with that. Now, we are charged with learning and correcting, as we once did many years ago.


But never have I heard so much lack of personal responsibility and so much passing the buck to some one else (i.e., the Government) as I have in this generation. We didn't recognize it, and the Government didn't either. Furthermore, WE put the government in place. They are a reflection of the American people. If they failed, that means WE DID. We are a nation and a government by the people, for the people and of the people.


If that's the case, which it is, then it's pretty clear who's responsible, and who is charged with fixing it.

WE are. The people of America.
If you want to pass the buck, and finger some entity like the government of the Unites States with sole responsibility for 9-11, and fabricate insanity like they planned it...you'd better look in the mirror...because you, and all the rest of us are responsible for what has happened. Trying to negate personal responsibility is weak and childish and counterproductive.

You have a choice to make...blame someone you think is apart from your will, or choose to fix what you started and saw come to fruition. I made my choice long ago...and it has nothing to do with anything but looking in the mirror and seeing the problem head on.


Maybe you might consider doing that as well, instead of seeking blame some where else.

I might be mistake, and have no particular source at the moment, but I am under the impression that Intelligence intercepted a communication from UBL, prior to 9-11, wherein he admonished Middle East agents to

"tie up" american aircraft (and, possibly airports- although, I might be mistaken about airports);

tie-up american shipping (possibly ports- don't remember, exactly);

tie up and attack America, economically.


Because UBL was suspected of attacks using bombs, FAA started sniffing for explosives at airports, and tended to overlook (deadly) 4-inch knives because the scanners were set to detect certain configuration explosives.


There were FBI internal memos about piloting schools and terror cells that were ignored within the FBI. It was revealed there were serious shortcomings and inter-agency rivalries, and concentration on other efforts, like drug enforcement, that took precedence. There was low-level INS corruption in Florida that was on to possible terror cells, but failed due to typical bribes.

I just have a difficult time thinking that 9-11 conspiracy included USG tacit or direct cooperation.

That's absurd. I am in absolutely, positively, not even the slightest bit responsible for what occurred on 9/11.

And your scenario with the astronauts, guess who's responsible for that - NASA. Not the American people. That's a load of crap.

You completely ignore the fact the government knew of these terrorists plans, yet they purposely looked the other way, and allowed it to happen. And why did they allow it, so George Bush could gain support for this war he wanted to launch in Iraq.

You then want to say that that is the fault of the American people? Absolutely ridiculous.

I am not the one in position to make decisions to make sure such things don't happen. You give a free pass to those who are placed in those positions when you go and generalize it to the extreme extent of saying every American is at fault for this.

Well then, I guess it was the people who died in the attacks own fat, lazy and complacent fault. I wonder if they make coffins for heros in extra-fat, lazy and complacent size?

We also now know who is really to blame for Bill Clinton's BJ. WE are. Who was responsible for the Kennedy assasination? WE were. Watergate? That was us as well. Iran Contra? Yep, you and I.



Talk about passing the buck. At best, there were failures of massive size that allowed 9/11 to happen. And who do you blame? Not the people whos job it was but the entire population of the United States. Frankly, if anyone is a "reflection of the government" it is you, because neither you or the government held a single person responsible for (as you say) being "asleep" on the job. And if any of the American population is to blame for 9/11 or any future attack, its folks like you who continue to place the blame on everyone but those whos job it was and is.

Well stated El.

Well, at the moment, the TSA is fouling up by the numbers repeatedly. Their security is constantly being tested by "test articles" and it fails to detect them at an alarming rate. Illegal immigrants and ex-felons working on the ramps and baggage areas, folks drinking on duty, TSA theft and drug rings, general incompetence.
Boston airport was evaluated by FAA "Red Teams" some time before 9/11, the dismal results were sent to then-Senator Kerry's office. Results...nada.

The press could have a field day with this stuff...but they don't.

http://www.aviationplanning.com/asrc11.htm

Well, MID will tell you that is the fault every person living in America, not the people actually put in position to take care of such things...

A little scenario to explain what MID was saying (I think )

Man "A" tells Man "B" to protect his house while he is away. Man "B" says "OK, no problem." Man "A" returns the next day to find his house destroyed, with a Cessna sticking out of the roof. Man "A" says "What the hell happened?!" Man "B" just scratches his head and says "I don't know"

Was it Man "B's" fault? yes it was.

Was it Man "A's" fault? yes, it was his responsibility to appoint someone to protect his house. He could have chosen wiser.


I know, its a poor analogy, but I'm getting sleepy, and its just my opinion.

Sorry, but it's nothing like that at all. Even if MID were to try and claim that is an equal analogy, it really isn't similiar in the least.

When the FBI turns a blind eye to information regarding terrorists' plans to fly planes into the WTC, then they are the ones at fault. To claim 9/11 was the fault of the American citizens is nonsense.

That, basically, is the theory I've always thought was far more likely than any of the alternatives. All the conspiracy theories depend on a level of machiavellian cunning that I just find it very hard to credit.

Brilliant. A heartfelt message to the 'pass the buck' generation.

Brilliant? It's nonsense. Has nothing to do with 'passing the buck'. It has to do with holding those that allowed such an attack to occur responsible for allowing it to happen.

How can people see something in PNAC that states the need for another 'Pearl Harbour' type of event to occur in order for the Bush regime to gain support from the American people for this war in Iraq, and not realize the amazing coincidence that 9/11 just so happens to take place shortly afterwards? That's all it was right, just one big coincidence?

All the sudden they turn a blind eye to the warning signs that existed warning them such a terrorist attack would occur, I wonder why... Don't even bother to acknowledge the lies they've told us about not having any idea terrorists would think of hijacking planes and flying them into buildings. It's OK for them to lie about that, they're the government afterall, they can say and get away with whatever they want...

And how bout the fact Osama Bin Laden is the one named responsible for the attacks, yet who do we target? Saddam Hussein. That makes a lot of sense doesn't it? And oh, no need to mention that all the information we were fed about why we targeted Hussein was a bunch of BS. We'll just skip right over that...

Seems to make perfect sense to me. People get the government they want, and enough of them wanted this one.

(What is this PNAC that everyone's always talking about?)

Ah, I looked it up. This I thought was rather amusing:

Oh dear, the most evil empire the world has ever seen hasn't paid the bill to its internet provider.

Actually, it's up for debate as to wether or not enough Americans wanted Bush as President.

It was the closest election in U.S. history when he ran against Gore, he lost the popular vote, and the state that it came down to (Florida) messed up the voting process in numerous ways. And oh, guess who was the Governor of Florida at the time - Jeb Bush, George's brother.

Just another crazy coincidence though, I suppose.

this forum is absolute proof of WHY they would go ahead with 9/11

JUST LOOK at the smug certainty with which these zionist trolls trot out their tired LOLs! and sundry insults, and if all else fails, flood
the forum with accusations of antisemitism. Anyone who thinks these people CARE if there are a small number of TRUTHERs who know what
they did? They have BILLIONS to spend on this crap. Not even a tiny esoteric forum like this is ignored. I have no doubt
that there are NSA/CIA people assigned to derail threads like this all over the net.

LEFTFIELD, you say it would require a level of 'machiavellian cunning' to pull 9/11 , as though there is some credible opposition
to these people. WRONG. These people are so arrogant and rich that they don't even care how many glaring mistakes are
made. Its all a big joke to them. You think they are shivering in their boots at the thought of some average single-mom housewife watching
9/11 Loose Change while guzzling DIET COKE and Doritos?

OF COURSE 9/11 was a false flag operation. Of course anyone who dares say so is a bigot with a small penis who hates all humanity.
Get with the program.

i see the intellectual level of the argument has stepped up a gear.

They might have "billions", but we have hundreds of trillions.

What concerns me is that we have a presidential candidate out there promising to lower the sea levels and mount up an army of schoolteachers, in the name of "change". His fawning, fainting audiences have yet to demand specifics as to how he will accomplish this, or even it's appropriateness. Should local schoolteachers be federal employees? They practically are now, considering the wealth of federal money being shovelled at the states to run them.

Lond ago, federal government was limited, limited to those national issues...defense, treaties, interstate issues, and the like. Now, they have their grips on daycares. And WE let this happen. Their accountability has become so widespread it is virtually impossible to track. Yet, many want to heap MORE responsibilities on them. Their web grows, as do the inefficiencies.

Their ability to properly manage things is slipping. On one hand, we berate them for allowing (in hindsight) a clear conspiracy of terrorists to unfold into the events of 9/11. On the other hand, we cry loudly when the government wants to evesdrop on international calls to potential terrorists countries. Yes there is potential for abuse there. The CIA couldn't talk to the FBI, share data. In hindsight, had the two communicated, the clear picture would have emerged. In today's legal environment, it's a no win situation for those responsible for keeping us safe. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

It's easy to blame an "illuminati" for the world's ills, but who are the "sheep" in that scenario? It's getting difficult to change things, what with so many looking to the federal government with help in every aspect in their lives. They heap their own responsibilities onto the government...with predictable results...more micro-legislation, micromanagement from the federal level, and armies of well paid lawyers. A new president won't change much of anything.

The feds cannot handle all their responsibilities properly. But trying to wean off just the slightest bit results in howls of protest from the affected parties. How does one fix this? Bigger government, with more responsibility?

Getting the states and local governments off federal funding for every minutia is...impossible. They are central in everything, but when a bridge falls, or a building burns, we turn to the feds for more legislation...and funding. They are becoming responsible for everything.

From time to time, something slips through the cracks, occasionally in a huge way. Then all the failure and inadequacies become clear. The result is too often more bueracracy with little change.

...but i'm rambling now...

Think you got me confused with someone else. I didn't make that statement. I happen to agree with a good portion of your comments.

Again, you ignore what was said.
You may have not been actively responsible in any way for 9-11. I am speaking to collective consciousness.
The people as a whole are responsible for their government. The government is a reflection of those who accept it and elect it and relax with it.

I never have relaxed with it or accepted it.

As to the astronauts, of course it was NASA's fault! What did I say? The illustration was to point to the fact that NASA didn't blame anyone else for their flawed system that resulted in the deaths of three fine men men.

They should've known.

It was on them, and they fixed it.

It is up to us to see, and understand, and monitor, and fix the government. And we can, if we wake up and realize our responsibility for ourselves. Look in the mirror and realize that you have the power.





Baloney.
You pass the buck again, with unsubstaniated crap. We elected Bush, and he wasn't the only one who was blind (in fact, he had no time to realize he was blind). We also elected Carter, who set the whole process up through his appeasement policies, and we elected Clinton, who did nothing about it, and who knew about these people. Further, we accept a media that says nothing about things like this....

It's the American people who are responsible for their government.

Get off the Bush bashing. He knew less than the others about this stuff...you just want to blame someone.





Ridiculous only if you don't read what I said through left-wing colored glasses.




You just don't get it, do you?
Yes, you are in a position to do so.

You have the power to vote, to read, to investigate, and to understand what's really going on. All Americans have that power. Most don't take that responsibilty to heart....and that's why we're in the state we're in.






So I have noted....

Thanks...

And that's pretty much what it is....

Indeed, Mr. B.
We've heard nothing but an undefined mantra of "change". Nothing of substance...save a brief record of legislative action that is frightening...





As is typical, when we reliquish our responsibilites and accept the skewed notion that government is the answer to all ills.




mmm hmmm. And Obama will do better how?





It sounds to me like you have a complete grasp on the situation....





While they demonstrably can't be "responsible" for hardly anything...




Rambling, perhaps, but astute, indeed...

MID,

What you do is basically form your own opinion of what America is, and how it functions, and anyone that disagrees with your view is a lunatic, or misinformed, or whatever else you wish to call them.

Simply because you view America in one manner doesn't make you right. You fail to understand that.

And oh, since you talk about the government being a reflection of the people, maybe you should consider what that truly means. America has how many criminals in it? How many murderers, pedophiles, people selling illegal drugs, and doing any numerous other number of criminal activities? To think that doesn't exist in the government itself makes you incredibly naive.

And by the way, Bush LOST the popular vote. He may have very well lost the state of Florida too had all their votes been counted properly. What happened there is a disgrace to the system that's been put in place for Americans to elect their President. Of course, none of the main stream media cares to cover what actually took place there and just how screwed up it really was.

And how bout the lies the government told us when they stated they had no clue terrorists would think to hijack planes and fly them into buildings? I guess you see nothing wrong with them lying to the American people about that, along with lying about the reasons we needed to invade Iraq... nah, you'll just bypass all those facts as if it isn't worth discussing.

The government is composed of politicians...politicians who have evolved in their craft to include focus groups, polls, surveys, etc to spin and twist with the prevailing wind...9/11 and national security, global warming, education, oil company profits. Whater the issue de jour may be.

They feel no ill in mistruths, spin, lies. They speak a party line. They are entrenched in their power. At the same time, as the bickering increases, there is talk that the "people" find the personal vitriol distasteful.

Bush did not lose Florida but that doesn't really matter this late in the game. It was a tight and bitterly fought race. But, in the waning days of this administration, where do we go from here? Can we expect "change"? Will the next administration and congress be any different? What will change?

I really suspect that Bush will be blamed for all the world's ills for the next 50 years, because it's the easy out.

America is what we make it, including laws against murderers, pediofiles, illegal drugs and other activities. Such laws are thwarted by activist lawyers or judges who attempt to change law in courts with frivilous lawsuits based in inane technicalities. Often, these "social norms" are currently seen as "hateful" and "intolerant". So, where is the "happy medium"?

We will all get up tomorrow, still living our way of life, doing what we do, and attempting to make things better however we see fit. And, regardless of our viewpoints and vehemence, we'll all likely be here tomorrow night as usual...bickering, arguing..but still with at least a freedom to pretty much say anything we like.

There are many, many folks out there not so fortunate. Their phones really are bugged...their internet activity is indeed monitored...closely. Their "anti-government" ranting is very dangerous and perilous indeed. I often think that the more extreme rants here would be seen as "useful" to an evil government...saturating the net with wild and nebulous claims, to the point that they are all but automatically dismissed offhand by the masses of viewers. Wildly flinging anti government stuff serves no purpose without substantial, verified evidence.

We're all miserable...must be so, the press tells us so. I'm still wondering why, in the midst of a national recession, a Golds Gym is replacing the grocery store up the street...??!!

Me..I'm good...not rich, by any means, but doing alright. I won't play in this recession, thank you very much.

Doesn't that cut both ways?
A conspiracy theorists 'tools of the trade' is google & youtube & their opinions are formed on the basis of other peoples opinions pasted on a web site, & as we all know anyone can paste anything on a web site.

And the second paragraph only goes to support what MID is talking about, i.e. the people get the government they deserve.

What a simplistic dismissal of what is a huge body of documented, documentaried, researched and referenced work.

We all know that any idiot at Fox News can put forward whatever distorted, inacccurate and outright false version of
events they want to put out.

If I had to choose between a television station and the entire uncensored worldwide internet for my news, I would choose the internet.
I would choose the internet any day over some privately owned clique of a newsroom under the control of some elitist group of rich people.
Any day.

lol

Oh, so all your news channels are corrupt & tell lies, & you believe that the internet a far more reliable place to garner facts...hmmm.....please don't bother to reply to this, as I'm pretty sure I know how your mind works.

You can find out the facts from the internet, I'm sure, but you need to be every bit as discerning as reading the papers or watching TV, surely; we know there's an awful lot of the "If it's on Youtube it must be true, because Youtube=Free Speech!" way of thinking, but freedom of speech also means that anyone can put anything they like on there, to prove anything they want it to. And the same goes for anyone who can afford to set up their own website* .


*Not including, it seems, the Project for a New American Century .

maybe you hope I won't reply because you are pretty sure I'll say something more convincing than you.

the internet is far more reliable because it presents many different sides/facets to the same story. It is still largely uncensored,
which means that people with discerning minds and a sense of balance get to weigh the information coming from all sides
of an issue.

Do you understand the concept of letting people judge for themselves what is true and not true?
Even the mainstream media gets a shot at contributing their take to the internet debate.

The fact that they are losing the debate the moment their lies are denied the protection of selective censorship speaks for itself.

That is a debatable assertion.

One of the most common mantras robotically repeated by the mainstream is 'don't believe what you see on the internet. Don't
believe what you see on the internet."

Did you know that Michael Moore has now been forced to do an in-depth 9/11 Truth video (still in production) because he was losing credibility by not taking on the issue head-on,
and the genre is now so popular that it made his lame 'Sicko' health-care documentary bomb at the box office?
Even main-stream guys like Michael Moore are being forced on board. (and don't bother telling me he's not mainstream. He is box office, big box, corporate product all the way)

Did you know that Congressman Denis Kucinich is moving to impeach Bush for 9/11?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVjyjAUf7eM...ars.com/?p=2661
http://www.infowars.com/?p=2661

btw, there's an awful lot of the "If it's on Fox News, it must be true, because Fox News = unquestionably pure authority on all thing in existence" way of thinking

If you want to be taken seriously, then you've got to be on Youtube.
Still doesn't make everything that's on Youtube automatically true, though.

Even if you just stuck to AP articles on the net, you would be far more informed than by clinging to the old guard of cable TV news. I don't know how people can even stand to watch that crap, 90% of it is about the likes of Britney Spears and OJ simpson or just partisan bickering. Most news shows are like bad soap-operas and the people who continue to solely base their opinions on them are like some villager in the 15th century saying "books? lol forget the printing press, I'll stick to the king's official decrees".

I agree entirely; just that you get just as much crap about the likes of Britney Spears or just partisan bickering on the net; on the other hand, you might be able a few nuggets of truth, sure, but you have to be selective about it and not just point to the presence of a Youtube viedo about the topic of your choice as if that proves your point.

Of course but thats an old concept, you can't believe everything you read, see or hear either.

And this "youtube" argument has run dry in my opinion, I hear it like everyday. Its a narrow illustration of the internet and is basicaly like criticizing the people who get their information from TV by saying "gilligan's island isn't real". I mean, they trust the TV for information and gilligan's island is on TV, so how can someone hope to differentiate whats true and whats fiction?

I understand your point and am not really speaking to you just expanding on your thought, but I sometimes wonder if the people who automaticaly don't trust anything on the internet know there is more to the internet than youtube? I have even seen people watch main stream cable news (which I assume they would believe if they saw it on the TV) that has been uploaded to youtube and they still use this argument "you can't believe youtube". Its like as soon as anything is on the internet it magically becomes "fake" and "youtube" is slang for the internet.

The trouble with Youtube is the poor set-up for disputing the content of controversial clips. I mean that only short replies are allowed and the OP has total control of these. The only effective response is another video, and that takes time to prepare. Here we can respond rapidly and at an appropriate length to anything we take exception to, but on Youtube that sort of debate just isn't possible.

Yea...that's it. You're obviously a really smart cookie, & I don't want you to reply because you'll beat me into submission with your superior intellect.

It doesn't cut both ways if one person is open to discussion rather then simply belittling those that disagree with them.

Your second comment is just extremely insulting to all American citizens. As someone else stated, by yours and MID's logic, I guess those that died in the 9/11 attacks deserved it, and had it coming to them.

People most certaintly don't get the government they deserve. Talk about "passing the buck"...

What's so funny? It's true.

To dismiss everything you can get from the internet only to act like the major media outlets portray everything as it actually is is pretty foolish.

The only reason you trust them more is because they are "bigger", which is exactly why they can tell most people whatever they want to and have them believe it.

[quote name='Left Field' date='Jun 13 2008, 10:37 PM' post='2343566']
It doesn't cut both ways if one person is open to discussion rather then simply belittling those that disagree with them.

Your second comment is just extremely insulting to all American citizens. As someone else stated, by yours and MID's logic, I guess those that died in the 9/11 attacks deserved it, and had it coming to them.

People most certaintly don't get the government they deserve. Talk about "passing the buck"...
[/quote

In that case, why does anybody bother to vote?

It's the only thing they can do. It's not like the people get to choose the candidates. Not to mention the role money plays when it comes to being a candidate and having the ability to get your name, face, and policies known. Those that don't have the money usually can't stay in the race, especially when it comes to Presidential elections.

And then of course there is the fact that just because someone gets voted in, it doesn't mean everyone voted for that person. In the case of our current President, he didn't even win the popular vote when he ran against Al Gore.

There is also the simple fact that just because someone gets voted in, it doesn't then give that person the right to do whatever the hell they want, and wether it is right or wrong, then point the finger at the people of America and say "Hey, your fault guys, you put me in here."

That's one of the most absurd ways of thought I can possibly think of in regards to politicians and giving them a free pass for all the things they do. I mean hell, if that doesn't sum up 'Passing the buck", then I don't know what does.

OK... Show us the 'documented' evidence that 9/11 was an inside job. Anything from a qualified Structural engineer, Architect (I am one), Metallurgic scientist will do. Please quote references.

One of the tallest buildings in New York constructed with a central core of steel columns is hit by an airliner approximately one third the height down the building, destroying approximately one third of the columns holding up the floors above & bursting into flames causing an intense fire..............what do you think is going to happen next?
One of new yorks finest is going to run up the stairs with a hose & put the fire out perhaps?

I've never claimed 9/11 was an "inside job", my claim is that they knew terrorists had plans to hijack planes and use them as missiles by flying them into the WTC, and that they allowed this to happen.

My reasons for thinking this, at a very basic level, is PNAC's statement that it would take a "catalyzing and catostrophic" event, such as a "new Pearl Harbour" in order to gain support for a war in Iraq. Lo and behold, what happens shortly afterwards? 9/11 does.

And who do we blame for 9/11? Osama Bin Laden. Yet, who do we then target? Saddam Hussein and Iraq. How that adds up is beyond me.

There is proof that the government (FBI, CIA, whichever you wish to call it) knew such an attack was in the works. There is also proof that they allowed for the bomb to go off during the first WTC attack in 1993.

It also seems there is reason to believe Osama Bin Laden was once a CIA assett and was in America under the name of Tim Osman.

If I took the amount of time neccessary to try and figure all this out and piece it together correctly, I'm sure more can be revealed then what many would like to believe.

But anyhow, I haven't said 9/11 was an "inside job". I've said the attack was allowed to occur in order for the Bush regime to gain support for this war they wanted in Iraq.

I mean hell, you say show us the "documented" evidence, as if there is some memo I should be able to find with George Bush's signature on it stating everything in black & white and clear as day. It tends to be a bit more complicated then that.

What, and it's the conspiracy theorist (naming no names, but we know which one we're talking about) who's open to discussion??


That's certainly more plausible than some of the more fantastical theories, as far as you argue it, but it does seem to be swimming against the flow of the majority of the 9/11 "truth movement". The majority of them don't seem to be satisfied with that, and want to insist that Bush actually did it himself. That seems to be the problem with the "truth movement" as regards credibility in general, I think; the more reasoned arguments get swamped by all the "Bush did it" fantasies, and all the paranoia about the NWO and the Illuminati and the Zionists that circulates on the fringes. I suppose in that way it's not to different form the world of UFOs, say, but that's a big enough field to accommodate all, but with this the serious case that lies at the heart of it, and the sincerity of those who argue it, and I do think they're sincere, gets lost in all the fantastical fringe elements.

you know, arguing logic with some of these people seems such a waste of time sometimes. I can't help getting the feeling that some guy has three or four aliases and sits
here using these aliases agreeing with himself, then patting himself on the back with another identity, and continually giving you these absurd two or three sentence rebuttals.

That scenario would almost be preferable to the frightening prospect that the public is really k=like this.
I can't help but be suspicious about this.
To begin with, some polls show that 80% of Americans are against the war. Yet to peruse some of these threads, one would think the public is enthusiastically thrilled
with the whole arrangement, and whats more, the public are woefully ignorant of the issues and seem to be on the level of people who regularly watch Katie Couric, Bob Barker,
and The Young and the Restless. Bearing in mind that people on the internet tend NOT to be from that demographic, and tend to be more informed on average, more technologically
adept, often higher income etc, and those here , from within said set demographic, spend inordinate amounts of time on esoteric political sites like this, which can often be
fairly 'dry' and cerebral in comparison to 'America's Funnies Videos', it creates a confusing picture. There's an artificial level of ignorance here, and even among people
who seem fairly articulate, some with above average intellect, yet there is this artificial ignorance manifesting among a number of people who seem to obsessively monitor the forum
(not moderators) as though their lives depended on it.

I see you took the time to lookup the PNAC, 747400. That the website has been closed down since last month was noted on this forum in the short thread here. You can still obviously read up on the group - Project for the New American Century

By the way, rather than an 'evil empire', the PNAC were the neoconservative think-tank who in the 2000 document 'Rebuilding America's Defenses' stated that a "new Pearl Harbor" was required to bring about their proposed plans. After confirming that fact for yourself, note how many PNAC members took up positions within the Bush Admin 8 months prior to the new Pearl Harbor type event that was 9/11... Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and John Bolton amongst plenty of others.

I'm not sure if the closure of the PNAC website means the group is now defunct though for anyone who wants to keep up with the latest neocon thinking a number of former members are listed as scholars across at another think tank - American Enterprise Institute

Yea, that pretty much does sum it up...

And yet you'll throw around the comments of how the younger people are the 'pass the buck' generation.

If politicians are allowed to make mistakes, or flat-out bad desicions, and then pass it off by saying "Tough luck America, you're the ones that put me here", then I guess they can just do whatever the hell they want and never be held accountable for anything...

Love how you ignored all the other comments, just so you can pick out the one you quoted and pat yourself on the back.

As El Midgetron first mentioned, and I have echoed, you must feel those that died in the 9/11 attacks not only deserved it, but that they had it coming to them... how very sad.

You're full of crap.

A completely erroneous mis-interpretation, typical of a left wing nut who hasn't the capability of perceiving what was said, and who want's to pollute a discussion with a bunch of crazy, unsubstantiated nonsense....kind of like the teacher we were discussing.

You obviously are uncomfortable with the idea personal responsibility, or collective responsibility--something also typically far left wing.

It's lazy, and it's stupid, much like your comment above.

THAT'S what very sad here...

Yep, and the German Jews deserved Hitler.

I have seen you make some pretty weak arguments MID but this one takes the cake. When it comes to "passing the buck" you are king.