http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848
This link is to a video that I feel is probably (and frighteningly) very accurate in it's inferences. . . speaking to your writing.
My youngest son sent it to me - he, like you, is the 'future' now.
Keep your eyes and mind open - it shall be your salvation. . . .
2006-08-02 08:58:07
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
In response to inquiries from CBS News over why Ashcroft was traveling exclusively by leased jet aircraft instead of commercial airlines, the Justice Department cited what it called a "threat assessment" by the FBI, and said Ashcroft has been advised to travel only by private jet for the remainder of his term.
"There was a threat assessment and there are guidelines. He is acting under the guidelines," an FBI spokesman said. Neither the FBI nor the Justice Department, however, would identify what the threat was, when it was detected or who made it.
Amazingly, Air Force One took off [from Florida after the attacks of September 11] with no military protection. It remained unprotected in the sky for more than an hour, though Florida is filled with Air Force bases just minutes away with planes that are supposed to be on twenty-four-hour alert.
Bush's aides later offered, and retracted, the excuse that he spent the day flying around the country because of threats to Air Force One believed to have been received at the White House. What nobody has ever explained is this: If you think Air Force One is to be attacked, why go up in Air Force One?
LINK
On Sept. 10, Newsweek has learned, a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly canceled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns.
LINK
At his press conference yesterday, President Bush was asked about charges that he had received warnings prior to the September 11th attacks that a terrorist incident was imminent.
He answered that even asking such a question was "an absurd insinuation."
LINK
The United States allowed members of Osama bin Laden's family to jet out of the US in the immediate aftermath of September 11, even as American airspace was closed.
Former White House counter-terrorism czar Richard Clarke said the Bush administration sanctioned the repatriation of about 140 high-ranking Saudi Arabians, including relatives of the al-Qaida chief.
LINK
The fact that top officials, at a time of extraordinary crisis and public anxiety, lied to protect the president's image has immense implications. If, within 24 hours of the terror attacks, the White House was giving out disinformation to deceive the American public and world opinion, then none of the claims made by the government from September 11 to the present can be taken for good coin.
If Bush lied about his activities on the day of the attacks, why should anyone assume he has not lied about the government's investigation, the identity of the perpetrators, the motives and aims of US war preparations, and the intent and scope of expanded police powers demanded by his administration to wiretap, search and seize, and detain suspects?
LINK
The 9/11 investigation was originally given a budget of $3-million, later increased to $12-million. Some reports say the budget is now $14-million.
By comparison, when the shuttle Columbia disintegrated during its descent in February 2003, $50-million was budgeted for an investigation, which began about an hour and a half after the disaster.
Another $305-million was spent by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), searching for shuttle debris.
The investigation into the shuttle accident began publicly releasing its findings within several weeks, and concluded its work with an exhaustive report about six months later.
Even the Warren Commission, the U.S. government's widely-disbelieved investigation of Pres. Kennedy's 1963 assassination, was budgeted at $5.5-million -- in 1963 funds.
Adjusted for inflation, that's more than $32-million in 2003 dollars.
You might think it would cost substantially more to thoroughly investigate a complicated event -- nineteen foreign hijackers commandeering four passenger jets and obliterating the World Trade Center, damaging the Pentagon, and killing thousands of Americans -- than to investigate the shooting of the president in a parade.
The Bush Administration seems to disagree. They think it should cost substantially less.
2006-08-02 16:04:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by tough as hell 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Saw the attacks in person and the only conspiracy exist is with the Muslim hijackers.
And all the evil Muslims who support these conspiracy websites. Trying to undermind America by getting to the mentally ill and having them spread rumors and lies about the US government.
The KKK, neo-Nazi and the Mafia work the same way.
My friend John Smith died a 5 years ago opened up a phone book today and saw John Smith listed is that a conspriracy?
2006-08-05 22:31:52
·
answer #3
·
answered by Man 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nobody knows. The deep roots of international relations are far too complex for ordinary people.
But incompetence always triumphs. 9-11 was not a cover-up. We might not know the whole story. But we know most of it.
The group that organized the attacks was very small, and in general, very few people knew about it. It is simply IMPOSSIBLE to keep a large scale conspiracy a secret.
2006-08-02 15:59:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by justwebbrowsing 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is so obvious it makes me ill. The information is all there in the public domain. The media is not handing it to us on a platter, they have their reasons. Bottom line, war is great for ratings, just look at the companies advertising on FOX, CNN, NBC/GE, CBS, ABC.
It is really right there in plane sight, it is choice of really wanting to know what happened. If you don't think our government was involved, you must be too frightened to look. I don't really blame you. Just don't say their was no involvement by our government, without really looking in to it.
2006-08-02 16:11:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by Waas up 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
So if you believe all that steaming pyle of pony loaf, is it so hard to believe that there are evil people in the world, i.e. terrorists and that they are smart enough to manipulate the media into swaying support for them, as they are doing in Lebenon. Hence that the civilian casualties are more limited than we are being led to believe becasue the Hezzbos are actually killing them.
Or is it just too much for you to handle that there are EVIL people in the world that want to kill you no matter what political party you choose to follow.
Oh and as far as your no WMD concept, you might want to ask some of your heroes quoted here:
http://www.freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html
what to believe!
hmmmm......
2006-08-02 16:11:25
·
answer #6
·
answered by jasonzbtzl 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The day I saw the plane hit the World Trade Center, my first thought was "Bush did it" I don't know why, it just came into my head. I have never felt comfortable with the the findings, and I never will.
2006-08-02 16:01:59
·
answer #7
·
answered by sassyk 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
You are a pathetic nut-job, and that's why your party won't ever win another election. I hope you get out and actively campaign for the Democratic Party to ensure continued Republican control of government.
2006-08-02 16:02:48
·
answer #8
·
answered by ? 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
all point to that, also you see the third bulding fall too and no one jet hit that building? where is Osama, where is the weapons of mass destruction? is a bunch a questions and no answers, but well, I love America.
2006-08-02 16:01:29
·
answer #9
·
answered by Love America 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
No no no, that can't be, our government cares so much about americans really...right? they care so much about freedom and democracy that they took it away from us, but that is just to protect us from the real bad guys...Bush is a smart good guy who cares about the world and environment...
2006-08-03 14:44:26
·
answer #10
·
answered by Cid2006 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
i am suprised you haven't heard the gold was given back , usually i get a personal call from the whitehouse on stuff like that
2006-08-02 16:22:17
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋