Well… welcome to the news for the next few days, weeks, months, years… and possibly decades.
From what I hear from the media, the Afghanistan invasion plan was already drawn up by the Joint Chief of Staff and ready on George Bush’s desk on 9 September ( just 2 days before September 11).
As our neighbors in the south say: Kaka Pasa (Shit happens). I cannot wait to see how this smelly diarriah is going to be cleaned by joint efforts of the Joint Chief of Staff, The President and his Cabinet, as well as the Republicans and the Democrats.
I still remember from the closing days of the televised Watergate investigations – There it was, the Senator from Hawaii (forgot his name) saying: “This is the end of this investigation, and we should congratulate this great nation and its democracy to allow the Congress to investigate such important issue, Thank you, and Good-bye”.
Somehow, I feel at the end of this so-called “partisan bickering” about “who knew what and when about September 11”, we’ll end up congratulating ourselves for what a great nation we are to have addressed the issue… and then, the curtains closes. End of the show.
In other words, you are alleging that the U.S. government is involved in some sort of conspiratorial plot to sacrifice the lives of American citizens in order to justify a war.
You want to argue that the U.S. government or some subset thereof was behind the September 11 attacks (or alternatively, knew that a foreign power or group was planning them but chose to do nothing in furtherance of some conspiratorial goal), go right ahead. Offer hard evidence; speculate; hypothesize; spin theories and what-ifs to your heart’s content.
You dodge and weave anymore about what position you are or are not advocating in this debate, and I’ll not only lock your thread, I’ll ask the Admins to review your posting privileges on this message board.
Locking the thread is all well and good, and definitely your right as a mod, but banning? A bit much, perhaps?
quote:
Originally posted by One Cell
Nobody is implying here that the son of the CIA director and a friend of certain energy companies somehow approved a plan for 17 Saudi Arabian suicide bombers to blow themselves off (thinking that they were serving Islam and going to heaven), crashing U.S. jetliners to the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, so that the budget surplus would go to certain aerospace or oil companies with total consent of the tax payer (forget the social programs). That is absurd, and indeed, nothing but a stupid conspiracy theory.
Perhaps it’s just my innate distrust of authority figures, but I for one took OneCell’s above comment as a sarcastic intimation that perhaps this is indeed linked to the OP.
It’s been all over the news for the past several days thatsomeone warned someone else before the September 11th attacks. Who knew what when is currently the subject of a Congressional investigation. We’ll just have to wait and see what gets shaken out of that tree.
But it’s no secret that the defense industry is making money as a result of the September 11th attacks. Here’s a shocker for you…
The defense industry made money off of Operation Desert Storm/Shield, the Vietman War, World War II, World War I, the U.S. Civil War, and the War of Independence!
Why spend the money to make an incident, when one always comes along in just a short time?
Anyhow, to sum up… Yes, the hawks use any incident to throw more money in the war chest, but the doves use the same incidents to state their message too. Conspiracy? I doubt it. Coincidence? In hindsight, sure.
I agree with Thurgin. No one needs to manufactor incidents. They can be counted on to occur. The question one should sometimes ask is, was an incident allowed to happen? That is, were warnings ignored by officials who wanted to do something (funnel more money to defense, curtail civil liberties, whatever) and needed an excuse?
In the case of Sept. 11th, I hope that there will be a good investigation. I’d like to know the truth. I don’t find it impossible to believe that warnings could have been ignored by officials who assumed (based on history) that a mere hijacking wouldn’t amount to much in the way of death and destruction.
I wonder if this ‘news’ story is as valid as the CNN ‘nerve-gas in vietnam’ flap?
Just because a ‘news’ source reports it, does NOT make it so. I strongly doubt that such plans ever existed, for a multitude of reasons.
Also, this story smacks of the sort of anti-Americanism that many (most) ‘reporters’ seem to love. Evil American generals, bent on global destruction! Ya, right.
Ah yes, if some stinky French protesters (as opposed to their American counterparts) call us terrorists, then we MUST be terrorists!
These are the some people that once upon a time opposed going to war with Nazi Germany. Wasn’t THAT a brilliant choice?
I find the French to be simplistic and naive in their world view. (At least, the world view that is translated to English or Serbo-Croatian, so I can understand it).
You do not ask for “proof” or “evidence” about sensitive issues of the day. First of all, I do not have it. Secondly, even if I had it, I would not be broadcasting it in public as my days on this planet would be numbered
Come on… Don’t be naive…
If you want a “proof” or an “evidence”, you’ll probably have to wait until year 2050, if you are still alive, or care.
Do you really believe there are “cites”, if there were any weird plans? What planet are you living in?
Reality is in the mind of beholder, just as beauty is…
I, too, live on planet earth. And I am your neighbor, at least in cyberspace, which is what SDMB is all about.
Back to the OP.
What is your view in light of everything that has transpired on this thread so far, including the threat from MEB (the moderator) to ban me because of this posting.
I must sound awfully unpatriotic. If you care about your neighbor, please open a new thread (in IMHO) to teach me how to become more patriotic.
That’s weird, since I believe the contrary. Pretty much every worldview from foreign countries translated in French (in the medias, for instance) seem extremely simplistic . I even noticed that the less important the country, the most simplistic the worldview. Sometimes the worldview of a country can be expressed in 5 lines or less.
By contrast, the french worldview is extremely intricate and complex, as anybody can notice in french medias. The french position on an international issue, even a very minor one, necessitates lenghty articles to be fully explained.
The Titanic is sinking, and the waiters are re-arranging the chairs on the deck?
Excuse me. Everyone on this message board knows what hijacking of a thread means.
There have been numerous threads in this board about the French and the U.S. opinion about them. Please… do a search and find out what has already been said to the tilt.
This thread is about something that the moderator is trying to censor. That is not a soap opera about the love-hate relationship of the French and the Americans.
Please, Clairobscur, do not divert the attention by going sidelines. Let’s focus on the OP, what has transpired regarding the OP so far, and the moderator’s threat to ban this thread.
OC: My view is that you’re yet another conspiracy theorist. When presented with alternative and believable explanations, you counter with “but they will do something terrible to me if I tell the truth! That’s why the truth can’t be proven.”