Date: 9/12/2002 9:13:00 PM
From Authorid: 54429
Now ihaven't read the whole post yet but i already see one mistake, comunications wasn;t top of the line back then if you've read a history book or made use of your brain cells, the informationg the attack arrived from Washington a day late. Now let me get back to the post.  |
|
Date: 9/12/2002 9:13:00 PM
From Authorid: 54429
And by the way thats about Pearl Harbor ^ |
|
Date: 9/12/2002 9:15:00 PM
From Authorid: 54429
Iraq does have weopons of mass destruction and thats a fact, and the Middle East has always been baout oil, nothing new here, but thanks anyway. |
|
Date: 9/12/2002 9:16:00 PM
From Authorid: 54429
Now i would take time to correct my spelling but that would take too much time. |
|
Date: 9/12/2002 9:17:00 PM
From Authorid: 54429
Oh and there no evidence what so ever that the govrenment knew about the 9-11 attacks, give me some evidence please. |
|
Date: 9/12/2002 9:18:00 PM
From Authorid: 54429
theres* government* lol i'm giving you a ton of replies. |
|
Date: 9/12/2002 9:36:00 PM
From Authorid: 54429
lol, i wish i knew the communist who wrote this. |
Date: 9/12/2002 9:47:00 PM
From Authorid: 44850
now . . . s.o.h. ... the whole name calling of communist was done in the 80's ... if you are going to call names because of political views, adn what have you, please, the term in this era is 'terrorist' (the ashcroft version of mccarthyism) ... now, i don't necc agree that the u.s. did know about it (tho i wouldn't put it past them), but the author does put forth compelling motivation for allowing the attack to happen ... *if they did know about it*  |
|
Date: 9/12/2002 9:51:00 PM
From Authorid: 54429
Terrorist is an name given by the goverbment to call the Islamo Extremist, that and communism are basicly one and the same but i prefer communist cause thats what they are. |
|
Date: 9/12/2002 10:04:00 PM
From Authorid: 44850
people accusing the gov. of wrong doing = communist ? |
|
Date: 9/12/2002 10:23:00 PM
From Authorid: 54429
Good point there, good difference between communist and terrorist. So i will call them communist becaus thats what they are. |
|
Date: 9/12/2002 10:26:00 PM
From Authorid: 55875
Are you refering to the RMS Lusitania, as in Royal Mail Steamer (an English ship)? The U.S. was 2 years away from entering the war then, so we just decided to take our time I guess? We had numerous threats around 9-11, but nothing specific, thats all. Our gov't isn't always on the up and up but a conspiracy of this scale is just too unlikely. Good post anyways. Benzman |
|
Date: 9/12/2002 10:30:00 PM
From Authorid: 44850
okay, a communist is not someone that just walks around and talks bad about the gov . . . LMAO!!! using it in that context is something that stemmed from sen. mccarthy .... back then, anyone that did or said anything questionable against the gov. mccarthy would label as a communist as we were fighting the 'war on communism' back then . . . much like now, how ashcroft is stating that people that do 'unamerican' things are terrorists ... sorry, didn't know that ya needed the history for you to understand my comment ... in all actuality who ever wrote this post is probably neither a terrorist nor a communist ... just because you are skepitical doesn't mean that you believe in communism ... LOL |
Date: 9/12/2002 10:49:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 7830
*listens silently* =o)  |
Date: 9/13/2002 6:16:00 AM
From Authorid: 15228
OMG!!! Really???  |
Date: 9/13/2002 6:29:00 AM
From Authorid: 2030
Well the story itself is pretty much bunk. And since it's from another site I assume it's just something the author has bought into. As for the whole communist angle, people should realize that there is a huge gap betweem Marxist mumbo jumbo- unworkable actual communism. And the reality in actual communist regimes which are actually totalitarian governments.  |
|
Date: 9/13/2002 7:02:00 AM
From Authorid: 15228
You say "his Chief Weapons Inspector says, "their is no evidence of weapons of mass destruction"..Well, HE isn't "Dubya's chief weapons Inspector, never was, never has been cause he was kicked out of Iraq by Saddam during the CLINTON presidency and he said at the time Iraq was resumming there pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and he eventually resigned in protest...now he is making money off of Iraq..yes it is all about the money..Do a little research and you will find that this is true.. |
Date: 9/14/2002 4:31:00 PM
From Authorid: 21867
Firstly...a link: http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/02_11_02_lucy.html  |
|
Date: 9/14/2002 4:41:00 PM
From Authorid: 21867
Secondly: Does anyone remember what they saw during the Gulf War on CNN?? All I saw was the far superior US and Allied Troops steaming in to fight what?? Fight half starving people with antique weaponary who surrended for food. What little resistance Saddam put up was smashed...and smashed thoroughly. Saddams main military might was NOT his soldiers...as his soldiers were ill equipped and ill trained...not to mention about as motivated to fight as a blind one-legged man with feather duster for a weapon. Saddams main military strength was armour. Which again was smashed thoroughly by US and Allied Forces. The Economic Restrictions, embargos and sanctions did more damage than any bomb or bullet did. How, I ask....HOW did Saddam all of a sudden go from a spent force to Public Enemy #1 who now apparently poses SUCH a threat to warrant a 'pre-emptive strike' without War being declared...which is just a nice way of saying 'illegal invasion amounting to a war crime'...luckily America has withdrawn from any world court so won't be held accountable...but back to my point - HOW did he suddenly become the Boogey-Man again?? Smoke and Mirrors...and a blood hungry populace, thats how. Peace, |
