Does it bother you at all that Bush repeatedly blocked all investigations into 9/11 for 18 months?

Question

The Bush administration thwarted the independent investigation for 18 months, what are they trying to hide...and why does it not bother very many people? Shouldn't they have worried less about covering their you know what and instead trying to find out what really happened so that a) the true masterminds could be brought to justice and b) something like that would never happen again?

Your thoughts?


http://tvnewslies.org/html/covering_up.html

Shyann...I don't trust anyone who says they are a Christian just b/c they are a Christian...that has to be the stupidest thing that I have ever heard. That is exactly what Hitler expected and you saw how that turned out. God gave me a brain and the ability to reason and I will use those gifts despite what you say.

And just because I am not a politician does not make me "not smart", it just makes me able to weigh the decisions without worrying about what my lobbyist buddies would have to say about it.

As far as Ivy league educations...rich people are able to buy them for the right donation.

Shyann, also...why are Christians like you so worried about what goes on in other people's bedrooms...we all remember Ted Haggard, Mark Foley, Jim Baker...good Christians, eh? And Falwell sees sex in everything around him...what a perv.

Answer 1

It bothered me at the time because of the wringer the administration forced the relatives of the 9/11 victims to go through.

I thought that the foot dragging was probably because of some actions that should have been taken to prevent the attacks, but were not.

As more information has surfaced surrounding 9/11, much of which was ignored or glossed over by the 9/11 commission report, I have become more cynical.

If the official version is 100% true, then there are still many unanswered questions.

Why was no action taken against any member or chain of command of NORAD?

The failure to recognize the net effect of all the drills running simultaneously, namely the loss of all air defense capabilities for the US against any airborne target, surely constitutes gross negligence or dereliction of duty.

Or even worse, how did a guy in Afghanistan infiltrate the highest levels of the US military, and recognize the opportunity that all of these drills would present on that date?

Can we only keep secrets from the US public?

Why were no members of the President's Secret Service and security detachments sanctioned for failing to remove our leader from a well publicized, totally unprotected location for even 30 seconds after he received the word that "America is under attack"?

Surely they violated the procedures for ensuring the safety of our leader during a domestic attack.

What order did Vice President Cheney get asked about minutes before the Pentagon self defenses failed to prevent or reduce the severity of the attack?

Why would anyone ask if the order still stood, unless the order conflicted with standard orders? Since the standing orders are to identify, intercept, and, if necessary, destroy any hostile targets, what would need to be modified?

Asking questions is not being a conspiracy theorist, it is being a patriot.

The given story defies common sense, both in the reality of the utter failure of our military to stop even one of the attacks, and in my understanding of the sciences involved, which is based in large part on my training in Naval Nuclear Power School. I am no expert in any single field, but I do have training in physics, chemistry, heat transfer, metallurgy, and fires.

The military uses concrete and steel structures at all of the firefighting facilities that I am aware of. They ensure as near perfect a combustion as possible to reduce pollution, which means that the fires remain at near their optimum temperature. They use a liquid hydrocarbon to fuel the fires.

The buildings and structures used in these facilities do not routinely collapse, We had no sailors falling through the steel grates.

When towers do fail, they fall to one side, especially if most of the damage is not uniformly distributed.

Path of least resistance, just like everything else in nature.

A vertical steel column will never be the path of least resistance. Unless removed by some means, the columns should have bent and fallen over if overloaded. Steel does not compress much, and does not shatter when near its melting point.

If they did fall entirely due to small amount of damage sustained, then why haven't there been any major investigations into the design or material flaws present in these three buildings?

Are we building new falling death traps with each new steel structure we erect? How many other buildings in the country present similar problems? Why aren't they being demolished or retrofitted to prevent the catastrophic failure inherent in their existence?

Something just does not add up. Either the official story is true, and we are still unable to protect ourselves, or we have made no changes because the attack was enhanced, permitted, or orchestrated by US officials.

We deserve better information about this attack. Since all of our domestic and foreign policy is based on a "post- 9/11 mindset", shouldn't these attacks be the most investigated, discussed, and documented event of our time.

Instead, we have spent less than on 99% of other major investigations, and still have so many unanswered questions.

Sadly, I think many citizens and politicians do not want to know because of the horrific reality that these possibilities could represent.

Nixon smiles from beyond, "I told you I wasn't a crook...A robbery? Big deal!!"

Answer 2

Yes it is rather bothersome. If his party was in the opposition side they would be asking about that strike at the Pentagon, airplane, what airplane? I watched that 911 reaction video to the Congressional inquisition to what happened on that day and the number of high military men and women that questioned the authenticity of the inquiry was staggering. Not only are there questions that were never asked, the follow ups to the whole mess has never happened. This one tops the shooting of JFK by at least 2 to 1. I would say that the true masterminds will never be found out and conspiracy theories will multiply over the years. Coverups and special permission for certain Saudi's to leave the USA when all other planes were grounded lead me to believe that those were the masterminds making a quick exit avoiding the heat after 911. Keep asking your questions and maybe you can spark enough interest for an inquiry into the inquiry.

Answer 3

Well, I think that is a common practice for intel agencies to cover up certain facts for public security.

But I certainly think that some very sinister things were going on within US government, US agencies and some private corporations regarding the Iraq war.

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. That is a fact.

Answer 4

It doesn't bother me because I know it's not true. All the people talking about this "inside job" theory have one thing in common, they are insane. Your source is not credible either.

Take a look at a credible source.

Well, well....gpaltrow2001, I don't see my answer as a one letter answer. Why do you feel the need to attack someone for no reason, are you that bored.

If anyone thinks this was an inside job, they are INSANE.
By the way, not all wars were initiated by Republicans, Vietnam/Johnson/Democrat, and many more.

gpaltrow2001.....What's up with the personal attack? The only one you are making a fool of is yourself. I did nothing to provoke you so STFU! A question was asked here that you did not even attempt to answer so you have no business posting anything here. By the way, have you heard of editing?

Answer 5

Most of the masterminds are dead, they died alongside the thousands of people they killed. The head one is hiding in a cave in Afganistan- we saw footage of people dancing around him as his plan was carried out. Never once have I thought it was an inside job.

'm bothered though by the way Intel repeatedly found Bin Laden to be a threat throughout the '90s and nothing was done towards his capture until he showed how dangerous he really is.

Answer 6

Yes it bothers me, being an Aussie and watching your country fall apart because of oil. I wonder of many people have seen this web site it might change your mind on a few things about 9/11

Please visit this site and keep an open mind, I know that is hard for many Amercians to do keep an open mind, you have been lied to many times by your Governmant

http://www.jonhs.net/911/#911_Documentaries

Answer 7

No. Because the people who eventually testified at the 9/11 Commission were kind of busy with national security and finding the bad guys.

They really didn't have time to play along in the public grandstanding sessions that were the 9/11 investigations.

I think it was more important that they do their jobs than anything else.

Answer 8

It bothers me a lot. I think what principally bothered Bush is that any such investigation was sure to circle back to Saudi Arabia (principal financier), UAE (principal money launderer), and Pakistan (principal logistic supporter), and he wanted to invade other countries - not those.

Amazingly, the 9/11 commission confirmed these facts, and Bush STILL invaded Iraq. Incredibly stupid - though who's more stupid - Bush or his supporters?

Anyone who's actually interested in knowing the facts behind 9/11 should simply read the report. Here it is.

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf

And here's the monograph on 9/11 financing.

http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statements/911_TerrFin_Monograph.pdf

And here's one of the juicier tidbits:
"The vast majority of the money funding the September 11 attacks flowed through the UAE. The fact that
Ali Abdul Aziz Ali was able to use an alias or partial name, and show no identification, for five of the six
wire transfers from the UAE should come as a surprise to no one."

On pages 137-138 of the main report is a detailed account of how UAE royal family members met regularly with Bin Laden in Afghanistan, and how their presence in his camp in 1999 prevented Clinton from being able to carry out a missile strike on Bin Laden.

So what did Bush do? Try to sell our ports to a UAE state-owned company.

There is NOTHING in either document of any consequence about Iraq. Zero.

Answer 9

Nah your going to have to provide a better chain of evidence then some link to a con spicy web site, but the i really doubt your able to do that, so you keep spinning the lies.

Answer 10

Bush is a great President!!! What bothers some people are
liars who think they are better & smarter than well educated
people who have alot more experience than they do!!!
It's funny how you'd jump at the chance to trust a liar & a
theif before you would a christian! True anyone can say they
are a christian,but I would rather take my chances on some
one who lays claim to it,than someone who doesn't take being
the USA president seriously,& feels like it's more of a long
vacation than a REAL JOB!!!
Like minded people attract their own kind,amen! When your
lover/spouse/whatever cheats on you many times over,then
I guess if you keep letting them,then you may talk about what
right for our Nation! Until then,let the intelligent people speak!
If a cheater who cheats on their own wife & child is what you
want,then you will get the same in your own life!!!
Cheating is a bad thing,& if you do it to your own family & you
also do not care about the disgrace you cause for them,then
you have NO RIGHT to be in a leadership position of any kind!