I Aint No Bush Supporter But....

[Spectrum]

I do not think that the deficit, per se is because of the war with Iraq. I would also have to agree with you that we have had deficits since the beggning of the formation of this government.
However, the borrowing, unaccounted borrowing, into special military programs, military spending (contract going to haliburton, GD, Defense, etc) all in the name of the War on Terrorism is what is driving deficit spending up to new heights. The interesting thing about the deficits is the idea that China is the biggest 'buyer' [borrower] for the United States, go figure that national security bs that was told to us before. At any time the Chineese could dumb our bonds back on us and we would be moved into hyper-inflation mode around here. Of course I know China would also have ill effects, but it is a good destablization tool.
When Clinton left office we had a total spending deficit of 2.4 trillion dollars. If spending stayed the same, we would have been out of all reasonable debt by 2015. The problem now is how can you ever stop the Republicans from spending, moreso when the people, continue to believe, under the myth, that the deficit spending is coming to fight the war on terror???
A prime example of this is SSI, everyone is lead to believe that it is in deficit mode. Go look it up on the GAO, it is positve. THe problem is that the Presidents (since Nixon) have borrowed money from it and have not replaced it and so a good way to make it appear that we got rid of deficit spending is ridding ourselves of SSI . .. 3 trillion down the drain, not bad when playing with numbers
Finally I apologize if I caused any trouble on posting off of our post, new to this forum, do not know how the mistake was made.

We have a love/hate relationship with China...because as you said they use alot of their trade surplus to buy securities in the United States. They could single handedly crush the securities market;however, being that we are the biggest consumers of Chinese goods, the have nothing to gain from seeing are economy shocked. But our growing trade disparancy with China is really a huge problem. Actually our growing trade deficits are a huge problem period. You can't go on forever consuming more you produce. There is going to be a huge problem when foreign countries begin to trade securities holding for real assets..how businesses, real estate, etc. We have already seen some of this with China's attempt to buy into the U.S. oil industry and another firms failed attemted at a takeover of Maytag.

China would never do it, but it is a rare sitation where another country does "have us by the balls" so to speak. That is very unfamiliar terroritory for the U.S.

Our biggest issue is the government's ability to borrow and spend unchecked. Our country was essentially debt free until the creation of the Federal Reserve System which allowed the government to borrow from a central bank unchecked and then a create an "income" tax to pay off the debt.

I agree with you about the spending though.

 

[Jakesnake]

There is a taping of Clinton stating that he was offered Bin Laden but he clearly states that he could not "Legally" go after him. I have heard the tape and when I find it I'll post it.

 

[Luke Cage]

3. In the two years since terrorists attacked
us: President Bush has liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled
al-Qaida, put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea without
firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his
own people.
The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but...
It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch
Davidian compound. That was a 51-day operation.
We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less
time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing
records.

It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy
the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police
after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick killing a woman.

#1. IRAQ NEVER ATTACKED US.

#2. The KURDS were not considered SADDAMS PEOPLE. Thats like saying the STROM THURMAN considered BLACKS his Own People.

#3. it TOOK Less time to take IRAQ then it took to get the BRANCH DAVIDIANS? (SHAKES HEAD) DUDE! AMERICA is STILL IN IRAQ FIGHTING. And 2000 SOILDERS didnt die trying to get DAVID KORESH. 51 DAYS yes but the USA been in IRAQ for 2 YEARS!


You need to start using LOGIC...

like RUMSFELD and CHENNY wanted to ATTACK IRAQ before 9-11 even happened.

or like THERE WERE NO WMD's!

or like OPIUM is now the #1 DRUG in AFGANIStAN... AGAIN!

or like SADDAM had no CONNECTION to 9-11

or like IRAQ was not a threat to the United States

OIL -----! OIL!

The MORE this WAR GOES ON THE MORE I BELIEVE THAT
OSAMA BIN LADEN DOES NOT EXIST ANYMORE.

 

[Makeherhappy]

#1. IRAQ NEVER ATTACKED US.

#2. The KURDS were not considered SADDAMS PEOPLE. Thats like saying the STROM THURMAN considered BLACKS his Own People.

#3. it TOOK Less time to take IRAQ then it took to get the BRANCH DAVIDIANS? (SHAKES HEAD) DUDE! AMERICA is STILL IN IRAQ FIGHTING. And 2000 SOILDERS didnt die trying to get DAVID KORESH. 51 DAYS yes but the USA been in IRAQ for 2 YEARS!


You need to start using LOGIC...

like RUMSFELD and CHENNY wanted to ATTACK IRAQ before 9-11 even happened.

or like THERE WERE NO WMD's!

or like OPIUM is now the #1 DRUG in AFGANIStAN... AGAIN!

or like SADDAM had no CONNECTION to 9-11

or like IRAQ was not a threat to the United States

OIL -----! OIL!

The MORE this WAR GOES ON THE MORE I BELIEVE THAT
OSAMA BIN LADEN DOES NOT EXIST ANYMORE.

I agree with you all the way up to the point that believing bin laden doesn't exist. They know where he is, but he's not the one behind all of this. We can send a man into space but yet, "we" can't find UBL.

9/11 = Military exercise (need I say, Able Danger)

And for the love hate relationship with china. We love them we their communist ways, but hate the for the media and public. I'll recommend another good book for you all to read, or even do a search on.

The Naked Communist - Cleon Skoussen.

New Orleans was another military exercise. Watch how FEMA's power is increasing with every manmade, natural, manmade/natural disasters.

 

[Spectrum]

I agree with you all the way up to the point that believing bin laden doesn't exist. They know where he is, but he's not the one behind all of this. We can send a man into space but yet, "we" can't find UBL.

9/11 = Military exercise (need I say, Able Danger)

And for the love hate relationship with china. We love them we their communist ways, but hate the for the media and public. I'll recommend another good book for you all to read, or even do a search on.

The Naked Communist - Cleon Skoussen.

New Orleans was another military exercise. Watch how FEMA's power is increasing with every manmade, natural, manmade/natural disasters.

Your reaching brother..reaching far indeed. I suggest you do a search for our other threads about "man made" natural disasters. Why do you think it would be so difficult for man to hide in one of the most cavernous parts of the world that is essentially the best place for a nomadic person like Bin Laden to hide...which has been one of the most hunted individuals in the world for decades...whom is also guarded by one of the most loyal groups on earth in an area where the tribes are symphatic and supportive of this cause.This is simply the needle in the hackstack example. They don't know where that muthafucka is. Bush would have held him up for the world to see a long time ago if he could as his grand trophy.

Break down your statement of:

"And for the love hate relationship with china. We love them we their communist ways, but hate the for the media and public."

Elaborate on that. It depends on who you mean by "we". Who is "we". Do you mean the illuminatists who want to see a one world government(new world order) ruled be a small group of elitist...who is "we"..because most sane people in freedom loving nations who have any inkling of what communism really stands for have no positive feelings for it whatsover.

I've read books similar to the one you posted. Actually it's on someones booklist on amazon and i've read many on the list, but not that one. I've added it to my wishlist. The only thing I don't like about books like this as that the often don't draw the line between plausibility of things that they can back with some evidence and then the things that they are "reaching" on and they just have an inclination..nothing to base it on. But I enjoy books like that..but one still has to be able to draw the line.

I love how you guys make HUGE SWEEPING claims about complicated world matters without providing one piece of supporing data, an assessment, etc. You guys must think that your claims are like Jesus turning water to wine or something..you say it so it is so! At least put together a short 6-8 sentence analysis with some logical assessment as apposed to just making some grand claims with nothing for it to lean one in the rest of your post.

I'm not even saying that you can't be right but do more than make statements like this:

We know where bin laden is
9/11 was a war exercise
those are man made hurricanes to give FEMA more power

Can to explain how you have come to the determination that "we" know where Bin Laden is? Do you can to explain how you know that 9/11 was simply a war exercise? Care to explain how we managed to create and strategically manuever a category 4 hurricane to hit a city with precision? Care to provide any substance to back your claims?

 

[QueEx]

<font size="3"> (1) I agree with you all the way up to the point that believing bin laden doesn't exist. They know where he is, but he's not the one behind all of this. We can send a man into space but yet, "we" can't find UBL.

(2) 9/11 = Military exercise (need I say, Able Danger)

(3) New Orleans was another military exercise. Watch how FEMA's power is increasing with every manmade, natural, manmade/natural disasters.</font size>

Are those just your opinions, or can you back them up ???

QueEx

 

[Makkonnen]

able danger is fact

OBL - former CIA asset/agent - family in business with Bush - shady? yeah but what difference does it make? The Commander in Chief exposes under cover agents and destroys whatever work they were doing and nobody says shit. I will laugh when Mexicans take over this whole country.

FEMA/Military - look up opportunism unless you can prove how they made things happen

 

[Spectrum]

able danger is fact

OBL - former CIA asset/agent - family in business with Bush - shady? yeah but what difference does it make? The Commander in Chief exposes under cover agents and destroys whatever work they were doing and nobody says shit. I will laugh when Mexicans take over this whole country.

FEMA/Military - look up opportunism unless you can prove how they made things happen

1. Able Danger: saying "is fact" doesn't make it so.

2. How many people have been schooled in the U.S. not only to then turncoat. Noriega, Castro, etc. Do you know the difference between an agent and an asset? There is a huge difference and the terms aren't even remotedly interchangeable. Also, that says nothing about his current whereabouts. Bid Laden has been an enemy of ours since the fall of Russia. We supported him because we had a bigger enemy in Russia. The former affiliation doesn't mean shit now so your point is moot. Bid Laden "declared a Jidad" againt the U.S. well before 9/11 and committed and took credit for various attack before that date. The Bin Laden family is a group of billionares. Of course they are going to have dealings all over the world. However, these aren't private investments into privated run groups explicitly and exclusively owned by the Bush's. Bush Sr. is a director at the Carlyle group..and a very small minority position holder...less than 1 percent...that has practically no meaningful position when it comes to decision making. So is Bush responsible for every action of everyone affiliated with any entity that he is remotely involved? That could constititute countless of people. It would be different if Osama Bid Laden were a direct investor. Those families claimed they have no longer been in contact with Osama. This is hardly unbelievable even if you can't prove it. Shit i have all types of family members I no longer talk to because those mofos are on some stupid shit. If one of my uncles or cousins blew up some shit..i probably wouldn't be in contact either and my private investments shouldn't be affected by their completely independent behavior.

3. Looking up "opportunism" does nothing to discredit the fact that no man, agency, organization, government, or institution has produced nothing even remotely..even on a abstract theoretical level..nothing that could produce "destruction catastrophic level weather events"...much less "applied science" and certainly not the ability to "control" them and strategically place them. To accept that as a reality is to admit that you are scientifically bankrupt. There can be no "applied" science" without first the theoretical discourse that provides the foundation. The theoretical knowledge does not exist.

So try again.

 

[Djmarkxr7]

3. Looking up "opportunism" does nothing to discredit the fact that no man, agency, organization, government, or institution has produced nothing even remotely..even on a abstract theory level..anything that could produce "destruction catastrophic weather events"...much less "applied sciences" and certainly not the ability to "control" them and strategically place them. To accept that as a reality is to admit that you are scientifically bankrupt.

I'm not a big believer in conspiracy theories however I would never sell the US government short on anything! They are capable of doing anything, anywhere, anytime they want to, just as l;ong as the wrong people are in the right places.
As to your statement above, I'm not saying whether I agree or disagree, I'm just adding something to the convo! If you read down, it states that a machine like this could possibly be used to manipulate the weather!

[FRAME]http://www.pacentro.com/HARRP/harrp.htm[/FRAME]

 

[Spectrum]

Djmarkxr7,

I think we've discussed this before, but nothing in HARRP equates the ability to create and control "weather events". Sending super-charged, high frequency radio wave into the earth's atmosphere doesn't event equate the ability to create and control hurricanes on even a rudimentary level. Comparing the two is like equating a man during the stone ages that clicks some flint together to create a spark and the ability to create and strategically place lightning bolts.

 

[Djmarkxr7]

Djmarkxr7,

I think we've discussed this before, but nothing in HARRP equates the ability to create and control "weather events". Sending super-charged, high frequency radio wave into the earth's atmosphere doesn't event equate the ability to create and control hurricanes on even a rudimentary level. Comparing the two is like equating a man during the stone ages that clicks some flint together to create a spark and the ability to create and strategically place lightning bolts.

The Eastlund patent also explains how HARRP can be used for "weather modification". Yes indeed, HARRP is so powerful that it can alter atmospheric wind patterns and modify the atmosphere's molecular structure!

Even though this is theoretical extention, the HARRP has been around for some odd 15`20 years so there is actually no telling what, if a government were so inclined, modifications could have been done. Remember that at some point everything is a theory until enough money and time are committed to any project. The U-2, SR-71, F-117 and B-2 bomber are all projects that were kept hush hush from the public @ a cost of millions and then billions of dollars and each one represents a technology previously thought of as "impossible" but all were accomplished!

 

[Spectrum]

Even though this is theoretical extention, the HARRP has been around for some odd 15`20 years so there is actually no telling what, if a government were so inclined, modifications could have been done. Remember that at some point everything is a theory until enough money and time are committed to any project. The U-2, SR-71, F-117 and B-2 bomber are all projects that were kept hush hush from the public @ a cost of millions and then billions of dollars and each one represents a technology previously thought of as "impossible" but all were accomplished!

I don't think you are getting the point. Let me explain. The U-2, SR-71, F-117 we are extensions of previous developed technology. These are nothing but extensions of technology and are based on appliable physics. These are what are referred to as "evolutionary" productions. There is nothing mindflowing about any of the previous stated machines. I.E. there will be a computer in ten years with a processer of 1000's of GHz.that is just Moore's law into action. It is a gradual progression of understood technology..i.e. evolutionary. Those fighter planes were not thought of as "impossible". They were meerly "bleeding" edge products.

Theoretically, we don't have any discourse that constitutes working scientific knowlege of weather creation. Not even theoretical science..and applied science lags decades and in some cases centuries behind theoretical science..i.e. we are still trying to prove or disprove some of Newton's, Galileo's, Einstein's theories, etc.

To make a claim of weather creation is a claim of "revolutionary" development..not evolutionary. This would be a creation of an new field of science altogether and that would need to be scrutinized by the entire scientific community and would take the brainpower of the best scientiest from several fields...physics, thermodynamics, meteorology etc. Nothing of this nature exists. It is a pipedream based on our current working knowledge of meteorology.

There can be no applied science without theoretical science. The claim of "weather creation" is without merit. Seeding clowds doesn't equate "weather creation".

To use your fighter plane example. Our ability to create a catestrophic weather event at this current time is the equivalent of a stealth bomber being created in 1820...with no planes, no understanding of jet propolsion, no understanding of thermodymanics, etc. It really is that outlandish of a claim. Maybe 200 years from now we will be able to "control" the weather, but there are still a plethora of unanswered scientific questions. I'm sure that HARPP is attempting to learn more about atmospheric pressure, etc with its various experiments, but that is a far cry from creating hurricanes.

 

[Djmarkxr7]

BTW, I don't believe anyone has any sort of power to control the weather, just that it's possible that someone may have the power to start or create the conditions to make certain things come about!
i.e. Seeding clouds with silver iodide to make it rain. You can't guarantee that it's going to rain, just increasing the likelihood that rain will happen. It also isn't too far fetched that setting off a nuke at a strategic point along a fault line would create a moderate-sized earthquake. Just pointing out possibilities.
Understand?

 

[Spectrum]

BTW, I don't believe anyone has any sort of power to control the weather, just that it's possible that someone may have the power to start or create the conditions to make certain things come about!
i.e. Seeding clouds with silver iodide to make it rain. You can't guarantee that it's going to rain, just increasing the likelihood that rain will happen. It also isn't too far fetched that setting off a nuke at a strategic point along a fault line would create a moderate-sized earthquake. Just pointing out possibilities.
Understand?

I know you are just throwing out possibilities. I do agree that there is technology that we currently don't know about..especially when you mentioned military craft. In your example for instance..the early forms of the stealth bomber we being tested in the 60's and were often mistaken for extraterrestrial UFO's. Currently when people spot objects doing mach 4 and then seemingly do a 90 degree angle there are mostly like seeing test flights of advanced military craft and mistaking them for UFOS. By our standards, a plane shouldn't be able to do mach5 and then proceed to do a 90 degree angle turn, but I'm sure that we are testing to very technology advanced military crafts that are decades away from being production models. However, even those would still be evolutionary crafts.

Again, I just wanted to stress the difference between evolutionary and revolutionary developments.

 

[Djmarkxr7]

True indeed!
BTW, This has CIA written all over it, LOL!!!

 

[Djmarkxr7]

Oh, and while the maneuvering capabilities, speed and flight ceiling were evolutionary, the radar-absorbing materials used to build them were revolutionary! While having a wingspan of 172 feet, the B2 "Spirit" bomber on radar appears to have the cross-section of a small bird and, by the use of heat-dissipating ventilation, heat-seeking missiles cannot properly track one.

 

[Spectrum]

True indeed!
BTW, This has CIA written all over it, LOL!!!

 

[Spectrum]

Oh, and while the maneuvering capabilities, speed and flight ceiling were evolutionary, the radar-absorbing materials used to build them were revolutionary! While having a wingspan of 172 feet, the B2 "Spirit" bomber on radar appears to have the cross-section of a small bird and, by the use of heat-dissipating ventilation, heat-seeking missiles cannot properly track one.

Agreed.

 

[Makkonnen]

1. Able Danger: saying "is fact" doesn't make it so.

2. How many people have been schooled in the U.S. not only to then turncoat. Noriega, Castro, etc. Do you know the difference between an agent and an asset? There is a huge difference and the terms aren't even remotedly interchangeable. Also, that says nothing about his current whereabouts. Bid Laden has been an enemy of ours since the fall of Russia. We supported him because we had a bigger enemy in Russia. The former affiliation doesn't mean shit now so your point is moot. Bid Laden "declared a Jidad" againt the U.S. well before 9/11 and committed and took credit for various attack before that date. The Bin Laden family is a group of billionares. Of course they are going to have dealings all over the world. However, these aren't private investments into privated run groups explicitly and exclusively owned by the Bush's. Bush Sr. is a director at the Carlyle group..and a very small minority position holder...less than 1 percent...that has practically no meaningful position when it comes to decision making. So is Bush responsible for every action of everyone affiliated with any entity that he is remotely involved? That could constititute countless of people. It would be different if Osama Bid Laden were a direct investor. Those families claimed they have no longer been in contact with Osama. This is hardly unbelievable even if you can't prove it. Shit i have all types of family members I no longer talk to because those mofos are on some stupid shit. If one of my uncles or cousins blew up some shit..i probably wouldn't be in contact either and my private investments shouldn't be affected by their completely independent behavior.

3. Looking up "opportunism" does nothing to discredit the fact that no man, agency, organization, government, or institution has produced nothing even remotely..even on a abstract theoretical level..nothing that could produce "destruction catastrophic level weather events"...much less "applied science" and certainly not the ability to "control" them and strategically place them. To accept that as a reality is to admit that you are scientifically bankrupt. There can be no "applied" science" without first the theoretical discourse that provides the foundation. The theoretical knowledge does not exist.

So try again.

rotflmbao
you dont get it

1. Able Danger is/was a real program - so I said its existence is fact

http://www.upi.com/SecurityTerrorism/view.php?StoryID=20051019-040108-6365r

Its been referred to by many - what exactly it totally entailed we dont know but all reports pointed to the US Pentagon knowing about terrorists and not being able to communicate it to the FBI or some such thing- regardless it was a real program whatever it was


2. LMAO I know all the shit you typed and wasnt arguing he was anything or a imaginary thing - the reference to the Bin Laden Construction ties to Bush Clan operations was just that - I didnt make any conspiratorial claims so "sorry try again" im not saying what you thought i was


3. I was saying FEMA or other govt agencies etc being opportunistic in relation to events that allow them to extend their power etc - I WAS NOT saying that they have a acme hurricane machine causing shit to happen lol so again chill

How unclear is "unless you can prove how they made things happen"? aka unless you can prove the can manipulate hurricanes aka blew up the levys etc

so like i said
1.able danger was a real program - fact
2. dont know what if any secret deals went down with osama
3. unless you have proof of weather machines and demolition teams fuckin with levys I cant go along with govt orchestrating shit - but I can see them being OPPORTUNISTIC aka haliburton no bid contracts and other stupid shit like labor law stuff and Mike Brown having dinner and not giving a fuck he was being told people were dying and then lying about it- and him still being on the govt payroll

you're preaching to the choir

 

[QueEx]

able danger is fact

Able Danger is a fact but the poster said: "9/11 = Military exercise (need I say, Able Danger)". I still don't understand (I could be missing it, as usual) the connection between 9-11 and military exercise ... and the same somehow being associated with Able Danger.

QueEx

 

[ajc921]

if he wanted to invade iraq....he should have been honest...i dont like these motherfuckers and that motherfucker tried to kill my father...i would have questioned the shit but i would have respected the fact that he was honest..that's the only prob. they sent powell at the u.n. and basically made him and the u.s. look like idiots...and then he fails us in the hurricanes, i mean this dude here does not need to be a president..i respect the facts but i feel out of all those leaders he is the weakest out of all of em...

 

[Spectrum]

rotflmbao
you dont get it

1. Able Danger is/was a real program - so I said its existence is fact

http://www.upi.com/SecurityTerrorism/view.php?StoryID=20051019-040108-6365r

Its been referred to by many - what exactly it totally entailed we dont know but all reports pointed to the US Pentagon knowing about terrorists and not being able to communicate it to the FBI or some such thing- regardless it was a real program whatever it was


2. LMAO I know all the shit you typed and wasnt arguing he was anything or a imaginary thing - the reference to the Bin Laden Construction ties to Bush Clan operations was just that - I didnt make any conspiratorial claims so "sorry try again" im not saying what you thought i was


3. I was saying FEMA or other govt agencies etc being opportunistic in relation to events that allow them to extend their power etc - I WAS NOT saying that they have a acme hurricane machine causing shit to happen lol so again chill

How unclear is "unless you can prove how they made things happen"? aka unless you can prove the can manipulate hurricanes aka blew up the levys etc

so like i said
1.able danger was a real program - fact
2. dont know what if any secret deals went down with osama
3. unless you have proof of weather machines and demolition teams fuckin with levys I cant go along with govt orchestrating shit - but I can see them being OPPORTUNISTIC aka haliburton no bid contracts and other stupid shit like labor law stuff and Mike Brown having dinner and not giving a fuck he was being told people were dying and then lying about it- and him still being on the govt payroll

you're preaching to the choir

I think I and QueEx meant: Able Danger in relation to 9/11...not about such "programs" existing. And I definately "get it".

 

[Makeherhappy]

Are those just your opinions, or can you back them up ???

QueEx

They can be backed up, all the way to "Classified" evidence. Now if you could answer those previous question we can continue with the conversation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger

Intro to the link:

Able Danger was a small, highly classified U.S. Army intelligence program under the command of the U.S. Army Special Operations Command (USASOC). It was created as a result of a directive in early October 1999 by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Hugh Shelton, to USASOC to develop a campaign plan against transnational terrorism, "specifically al-Qaida." According to claims made by Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and confirmed by four others, Able Danger had identified the 9/11 attack leader, Mohamed Atta, and three other 9/11 hijackers as possible members of an al Qaeda cell operating in the United States by mid-2000, more than a year before the attack. Data mining has been cited as the method by which this information was found. The claim appears to contradict the official conclusion of the 9/11 Commission that American intelligence agencies had not identified Atta as a terrorist prior to the attack. This has resulted in a political controversy that has begun to damage the credibility of the bipartisan 9/11 Commission.


any answers to the question?

We need to stop lying to people, and stop continuing the lie.

 

[Spectrum]

They can be backed up, all the way to "Classified" evidence. Now if you could answer those previous question we can continue with the conversation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger

Intro to the link:

Able Danger was a small, highly classified U.S. Army intelligence program under the command of the U.S. Army Special Operations Command (USASOC). It was created as a result of a directive in early October 1999 by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Hugh Shelton, to USASOC to develop a campaign plan against transnational terrorism, "specifically al-Qaida." According to claims made by Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and confirmed by four others, Able Danger had identified the 9/11 attack leader, Mohamed Atta, and three other 9/11 hijackers as possible members of an al Qaeda cell operating in the United States by mid-2000, more than a year before the attack. Data mining has been cited as the method by which this information was found. The claim appears to contradict the official conclusion of the 9/11 Commission that American intelligence agencies had not identified Atta as a terrorist prior to the attack. This has resulted in a political controversy that has begun to damage the credibility of the bipartisan 9/11 Commission.


any answers to the question?

We need to stop lying to people, and stop continuing the lie.

Did you think this really supports your claim that 9/11 was simply a war exercise? Did you really read your cited material? Thers is NOTHING conclusive there. We had some basic sweeps of many of the people involved in the hijackings. This is no secret. However, our agencies weren't sharing information and nothing was vehemently pursued. Also, do you know what "classified" information means. It means that it won't be found on "wikipedia". ****sighs*** Also, this does not explicitly draw a connection between 9/11 and a government plot. What it does illustrate is an inefficient intelligence system that wasn't properly assessing and sharing information from all of its dispirate info hubs. The things you guys consider "evidence" is amazing. You better not ever take this type of thing into a courtroom typeof environment where evidence is critiqued for its relevance and substantive weight...***sighs again**** And it wasn't some complicated data mining that raised the red flag. It was the several hundred thousand dollars in wire transfers into their accounts that came it from the middle east.The BANKS raised the flags and then informed the FBI. Subsequently,phone records were then checked but they often spoke in code that never mentioned exactly anything they were up to. Bank records and phone records hardly constitute sophisticated data mining operations. Also, learn to logically exist the information you read and don't fall to hasty conclusions. You made a huge leap from Able Danger to goverment plot without building any bridges. That often results in a drowning.

 

[Makeherhappy]

Did you think this really supports your claim that 9/11 was simply a war exercise? Did you really read your cited material? Thers is NOTHING conclusive there. We had some basic sweeps of many of the people involved in the hijackings. This is no secret. However, our agencies weren't sharing information and nothing was vehemently pursued. Also, do you know what "classified" information means. It means that it won't be found on "wikipedia". ****sighs*** Also, this does not explicitly draw a connection between 9/11 and a government plot. What it does illustrate is an inefficient intelligence system that wasn't properly assessing and sharing information from all of its dispirate info hubs. The things you guys consider "evidence" is amazing. You better not ever take this type of thing into a courtroom typeof environment where evidence is critiqued for its relevance and substantive weight...***sighs again**** And it wasn't some complicated data mining that raised the red flag. It was the several hundred thousand dollars in wire transfers into their accounts that came it from the middle east.The BANKS raised the flags and then informed the FBI. Subsequently,phone records were then checked but they often spoke in code that never mentioned exactly anything they were up to. Bank records and phone records hardly constitute sophisticated data mining operations. Also, learn to logically exist the information you read and don't fall to hasty conclusions. You made a huge leap from Able Danger to goverment plot without building any bridges. That often results in a drowning.

Oh, Not at all. We will never has access to the evidence. But this is a start.

Like the game of chess, many pieces are part of the total victory.

As a matter of fact, have you read the Grand Chess Board? If not, get back to me when you do. It's all about pieces of the puzzle and a lot of people are in on it.

Be easy

 

[Spectrum]

Oh, Not at all. We will never has access to the evidence. But this is a start.

Like the game of chess, many pieces are part of the total victory.

As a matter of fact, have you read the Grand Chess Board? If not, get back to me when you do. It's all about pieces of the puzzle and a lot of people are in on it.

Be easy

Actually if you are using classified evidence as a support column...remember that after 40 years it become declassified. So we will have access.

Essentially what I'm telling you do to is become a better chess player yourself. You are't thinking before you make a move(which leads to you being checked)...i.e..you aren't thinking before you use something as evidence(which also leads to you being checked).

Again, that book does nothing to support the "able danger" claim or anything claim in this thread...it's just a book about geopolitics and global hegemony. I've devoured many in its class. Still does nothing to make the case about "able danger". How about you expound now and not later and why you think "The Grand Chessboard" was important enough to mention. It was important enough to mention..take some time to expand on that thought.

 

[Makeherhappy]

Actually if you are using classified evidence as a support column...remember that after 40 years it become declassified. So we will have access.

Essentially what I'm telling you do to is become a better chess player yourself. You are't thinking before you make a move(which leads to you being checked)...i.e..you aren't thinking before you use something as evidence(which also leads to you being checked).

Again, that book does nothing to support the "able danger" claim or anything claim in this thread...it's just a book about geopolitics and global hegemony. I've devoured many in its class. Still does nothing to make the case about "able danger". How about you expound now and not later and why you think "The Grand Chessboard" was important enough to mention. It was important enough to mention..take some time to expand on that thought.

Paragraph 1
-To long people can't be prosecuted.

Paragraph 2
-First of all, i'm not going to sit here and put all the information I have for you to connect the dots for you. That would be showing my great side of chess. Don't ASSume that i'm not thinking before, just to recheck that point.

Paragraph 3
-If you have not read the book, then my expounding on the book would do you no justice.

Now I repeat a question to you, have you read the book?

 

[Spectrum]

Paragraph 1
-To long people can't be prosecuted.

We aren't talking about presecuting people, we are talking about understanding what truly happened.

Paragraph 2
-First of all, i'm not going to sit here and put all the information I have for you to connect the dots for you. That would be showing my great side of chess. Don't ASSume that i'm not thinking before, just to recheck that point.

I'm not asking you to connect the dots for me. I've already connected them. I'm asking you to support your claims with real evidence or just say "it is my opinion" as opposed to saying "this is a fact". I'm not assuming what you are doing. I'm just stating the obvious: if you are using "Able Danger" as your evidence of a government conspiracy for 9/11, it is a weak connection and you seriously need to reconsider what you constitute as evidence.
Paragraph 3
-If you have not read the book, then my expounding on the book would do you no justice.

Now I repeat a question to you, have you read the book?
I don't need you to do me any justice. You need to make the connection as why this book is important to your claim. I've not only put that one down, but i can lead you to many others that speak the same thing...the new american empire and the world,understand the american empire,Stategic Diplomacy through thoughout the ages..you can even find good ones to read at the guttenburg project online for free to download etc

Your answers are above in bold.

 

[Makeherhappy]

Your answers are above in bold.

So I understand,

We wait 40 years to find out what really happened? Then what, who do you hold responsible, no one?


I made reference to Able Danger just to state they had previous knowledge of this "threat." The fact that top individuals in our government have been monitoring, "In my opinion" they had to have receive some type of transmission that it was going down. They did nothing to react.

Since you do a lot of reading, you were aware of a lot of laws that were being shot down prior to 9/11, were passed post 9/11. "In my personal opinion," that motive looks like control by fear.

I've read them all and a couple of more that should have been top on the list.

 

[Spectrum]

So I understand,

We wait 40 years to find out what really happened? Then what, who do you hold responsible, no one?

You need to check your reading comprehension skills. You stated that the information would never be available. I meerly pointed out the flawed statement. I said that classified information becomes declassified after 40 years. I was just pointing out that your proclamation wasn't incorrect. I made no statements about waiting to see what really happened. I've already mentiond that one needs to find and evaluate the available information with a discerning eye. I never implied waiting or holding no one responsible.

I made reference to Able Danger just to state they had previous knowledge of this "threat." The fact that top individuals in our government have been monitoring, "In my opinion" they had to have receive some type of transmission that it was going down. They did nothing to react.

It wasn't a "threat" at the point. They were meerly one of the many "suspicious characters our agencies are tracking around the world. However, after 9/11 i'm sure they are much more aggressive with pursuing leads. Remember, these gentlemen prepared for 2 years before coming to the U.S. They never made any statements on their cellphones that speak of any attacks. They always meet in secretive locations and even when meeting face to face...they still spoke in codes. They were very precautious and when evaluationg Mohammad Attam's life..he became apparent that is was a life long perfectionist who paid attention to details. He wouldn't allow this team to make careless mistakes. Also being that is a was a small cell..it is very easy to see how they woudn't have set off a ton of alarms...pre 9/11. Understand that we hadn't been under attack within out borders every day like Israel for instance.

Since you do a lot of reading, you were aware of a lot of laws that were being shot down prior to 9/11, were passed post 9/11. "In my personal opinion," that motive looks like control by fear.

You are speaking about the Patriot Acts, etc. Was that premeditated or taking advantage of the situation...like how some looters took advantage in New Orleans. Do you mean to say that the looters created the hurricane so that they could take advantage..or as how most humans do..they saw on opportunity to "take"..i'm speaking of both sitations. The Patriots Acts submission doesn't presuppose the creation of 9/11 by the U.S government.
I've read them all and a couple of more that should have been top on the list.
Certainly wasn't an all inclusive list. However, you still haven't stated by that book was important enough to mention without expounding

Your reply is above.

 

[Makeherhappy]

See this is something,

40 years, from now, the information that will be released won't shed any light on the subject. I'm sorry for not making my proclamation understandable for you. ***sigh****

So at what point was it a theat, oh let me guess when they boarded the plane? ****sigh*****
merriam webster defn. of

- ABLE - having sufficient power, skill, or resources to accomplish an object b : susceptible to action or treatment
2 : marked by intelligence, knowledge, skill, or competence

- DANGER - archaic : JURISDICTION b obsolete : REACH, RANGE
2 obsolete : HARM, DAMAGE
3 : exposure or liability to injury, pain, harm, or loss <a place where children could play without danger>
4 : a case or cause of danger <the dangers of mining>

By the name alone, ABLE DANGER, you don't think it is a threat. That's from the dictionary.

And Finally,

That has to be one of the dumbest questions ever asked, bush himself could have done better, "Do you mean to say that the looters created the hurricane so that they could take advantage..or as how most humans do..they saw on opportunity to "take"

Hell no,

But I will rephrase your question appropriately, Do you mean to say that the powers that be created 9/11, so that they could take advantage?

then yes. that is my belief, I guess we'll get some of the proof in 40 years. And even then the "truth" won't come out.

*****sigh******

 

[Spectrum]

See this is something,

40 years, from now, the information that will be released won't shed any light on the subject. I'm sorry for not making my proclamation understandable for you. ***sigh****

So at what point was it a theat, oh let me guess when they boarded the plane? ****sigh*****
merriam webster defn. of

- ABLE - having sufficient power, skill, or resources to accomplish an object b : susceptible to action or treatment
2 : marked by intelligence, knowledge, skill, or competence

- DANGER - archaic : JURISDICTION b obsolete : REACH, RANGE
2 obsolete : HARM, DAMAGE
3 : exposure or liability to injury, pain, harm, or loss <a place where children could play without danger>
4 : a case or cause of danger <the dangers of mining>

By the name alone, ABLE DANGER, you don't think it is a threat. That's from the dictionary.

You are going to have to do much better than this. Have you forgetted that you quoted a specific case in the Wikepedia. This was not a case of semantics. of two independent terms placed together to create a new meaning. You cited a specific program named "Able Danger" with an explicit meaning and relevancy of its own. You are going to have to do better than that...classic Bifurcation..your argument is fallacious on many accounts and that is just one of them. Your backpeddling only strengthening my case that you really don't know WTF you are talking about.
And Finally,

That has to be one of the dumbest questions ever asked, bush himself could have done better, "Do you mean to say that the looters created the hurricane so that they could take advantage..or as how most humans do..they saw on opportunity to "take"

It was purposely written that way..i was reworded your dumb statement into an equally stupid question. That was the point of it. I'm glad you identified that..which makes it all the more ironic and funny.

Hell no,

But I will rephrase your question appropriately, Do you mean to say that the powers that be created 9/11, so that they could take advantage?

then yes. that is my belief, I guess we'll get some of the proof in 40 years. And even then the "truth" won't come out.

*****sigh******

Your replies are above. Still waiting on you to eloborate on that book. I may begin to wonder if you've even read it yourself.

 

[Makeherhappy]

You know, you are hopeless. At times, i don't know if you writing from talking points on both sides. Narrow minds like yours are the reason, the world is in it's current situation.

And i don't believe you read anything or have a clue what you are talking about.

But please continue to type i've sent this thread to a couple of people for laughs

Thanks, keep up the good work

 

[Spectrum]

You know, you are hopeless. At times, i don't know if you writing from talking points on both sides. Narrow minds like yours are the reason, the world is in it's current situation.

And i don't believe you read anything or have a clue what you are talking about.

But please continue to type i've sent this thread to a couple of people for laughs

Thanks, keep up the good work

I haven't been sophistic at all. Meerly asked you to back up your statements. You sending it to your friends means absolutely nothing to me. You've written nothing worthy enough from an intellectually or comedic point of view to warrant me actually wanting to take the time to bother my friends about it. But again, thanks for showing you ass and backpeddling more. I think you have now officially OWNED yourself.

 

[Makeherhappy]

I haven't been sophistic at all. Meerly asked you to back up your statements. You sending it to your friends means absolutely nothing to me. You've written nothing worthy enough from an intellectually or comedic point of view to warrant me actually wanting to take the time to bother my friends about it. But again, thanks for showing you ass and backpeddling more. I think you have now officially OWNED yourself.

Tha's funny, they said the same thing about you. Your talking points must have ran out. Hope you are around in 40 years

Your indictment of ignorance, entertaining. Thanks.