Full Version: Topic Closed
Nothing quite like starting out with a leading topic title, eh? 
From the opening paragraph of the Rasmussen Reports release on a recent poll:
Democrats in America are evenly divided on the question of whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats believe he did know, 39% say he did not know, and 26% are not sure.
Questions for debate:
1.) How could/would Bush have known?
2.) What other national and/or world leaders are likely candidates for this knowledge?
3.) Have you heard any charges that the governing Spanish administration at the time knew of the Madrid bombings?
4.) Should we consider a blanket restriction on firearms possession by those who either a) believe Bush knew, or
insist resolutely that he didn't, based on the argument that they are so out of touch with reality as to pose a danger to their fellow citizens? (Pick the "reality basis" of your choice for purposes of this question)
5.) How should outlandish charges, or suppressed truth (again, take your pick) of this nature best be disseminated/combatted?
From the opening paragraph of the Rasmussen Reports release on a recent poll:
Democrats in America are evenly divided on the question of whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats believe he did know, 39% say he did not know, and 26% are not sure.
Questions for debate:
1.) How could/would Bush have known?
2.) What other national and/or world leaders are likely candidates for this knowledge?
3.) Have you heard any charges that the governing Spanish administration at the time knew of the Madrid bombings?
4.) Should we consider a blanket restriction on firearms possession by those who either a) believe Bush knew, or
insist resolutely that he didn't, based on the argument that they are so out of touch with reality as to pose a danger to their fellow citizens? (Pick the "reality basis" of your choice for purposes of this question)5.) How should outlandish charges, or suppressed truth (again, take your pick) of this nature best be disseminated/combatted?
This topic will be closed shortly, no question.
If you have been too closed minded, or too lazy to look at 911 research, lax to question objectively the 'official story', the proof that the official story has ANY validity is on you, not for you to question the sanity of those that HAVE done the years of research.
The governnment has not a speck of proof for the fantasy it has put forth, and this attempt to make anyone who thinks otherwise- unable to carry firearms-is a weak, transparent straw man-working diligently against both freedom of speech and 2nd amendment , for what reason I cannot possibly fathom. Do you think Martial Law or dictatorship serves you somehow?
The questions are posed incorrectly. Neither Bush nor the CIA had control over the situation. The CIA and FBI were given stand down orders from the top about terrorists relating to 911. Many of the alleged hijackers were trained at military installations, were followed, surveilled, phone calls listened to, but not arrested. At least 7 are still alive, but the list has never been edited to admit this fact.
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project...ect=911_project
Bush acted like an idiot on 911, but he acts like an idiot almost always. The question is why the Secret Service did not change Bush's plans to visit a classroom AFTER the attacks on NYC were known by the reporters in the Presidential pool, and by the President himself.
Why were ALL protocols ignored on 911. Why did NORAD stand down. Why was the Pentagon, the most protected building in the World still open to attack after 2 already known attacks, at least an hour after the first attack? Why no one has been held accountable, instead given medals, promoted and given raises after 911. Why did the government stall 911 investigations and under- finance them. Why are 911 Families the basis of the 911 Truth movement after none of their questions have been adequately answered. After they sat through a farce of 911 Commission hearings, frustrated and convinced of a cover up, enough to begin a nation-wide movement. Why did WTC7 collapse in one piece in its footprint at freefall speed? Why did Rumsfeld make a gaffe that flight 93 was shot down? Why did Bush say he SAW the first attack? Why did Silverstein say a decision was made to 'pull WTC7?' Why, as more people actually 'look' at the evidence surrounding WTC change their minds, and become not only knowing , but activist members of 911 Truth?
Why have Military Generals and Servicemen, Congressmen, Legislators, physics professors, engineers, pilots, many who were on 911 duty, mental health professionals, the 911 families, and a slew of thinking coherant citizens- join the 911 Truth Movements and are active in every city in every State in the US?
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/...fact-sheet.html
4.) Should we consider a blanket restriction on firearms possession by those who either a) believe Bush knew, or insist resolutely that he didn't, based on the argument that they are so out of touch with reality as to pose a danger to their fellow citizens? (Pick the "reality basis" of your choice for purposes of this question)
5.) How should outlandish charges, or suppressed truth (again, take your pick) of this nature best be disseminated/combatted?
You are an enemy of freedom. What you are proposing is dictatorship of ideas, but worse, actions. These questions deserve no answer, because they are absolutely totalitarian. You are proposing arming only one side of the debate, for how long? You make me laugh and also be sad because
I realize you think this is real.
You are a dangerous individual to freedom and any sort of democracy.
Heard of a river in Egypt?
Well..... You cant have my freedom of speech rights, nor my right to own guns because you think one thing and I another. Explain this absurd connection to arms ownership, BTW. You are totally reaching. You want 'some' of us disarmed?
You are asking here for a consensus on that? haahahah!
For the public, look closely at this argument. If you disagree with ANY,( from here to eternity) 'official story' you deserve to be disarmed, and after you are disarmed? WTF happens next?
Bikerdad calls for a Blanket Restriction on firearms for people who think differently than He and/or the All Powerful Government Officials, both corrupt.
Even though he is uninformed and uneducated about the facts and is really a total nobody as far as a power base goes, HE just FEELS the government is right, the post fools no one.
You see how ignorance can affect your life in the New World, Partriot ACT and a fear based , law by a mob society?
A Country or citizenry under attack does not need disarmament. Nor some jack-f-wit trying to obfucate the truth, that people are finding out for themelves, day after day. But thanks for making the job easier
If you have been too closed minded, or too lazy to look at 911 research, lax to question objectively the 'official story', the proof that the official story has ANY validity is on you, not for you to question the sanity of those that HAVE done the years of research.
The governnment has not a speck of proof for the fantasy it has put forth, and this attempt to make anyone who thinks otherwise- unable to carry firearms-is a weak, transparent straw man-working diligently against both freedom of speech and 2nd amendment , for what reason I cannot possibly fathom. Do you think Martial Law or dictatorship serves you somehow?
The questions are posed incorrectly. Neither Bush nor the CIA had control over the situation. The CIA and FBI were given stand down orders from the top about terrorists relating to 911. Many of the alleged hijackers were trained at military installations, were followed, surveilled, phone calls listened to, but not arrested. At least 7 are still alive, but the list has never been edited to admit this fact.
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project...ect=911_project
Bush acted like an idiot on 911, but he acts like an idiot almost always. The question is why the Secret Service did not change Bush's plans to visit a classroom AFTER the attacks on NYC were known by the reporters in the Presidential pool, and by the President himself.
QUOTE
The Longest Day
CBS News Producer Kia Baskerville Was With The President
WASHINGTON
(CBS) Kia Baskerville is a CBS News White House producer. She was traveling with President Bush when the terror attacks occurred on Sept. 11, 2001
"I went on the Florida trip at the last minute, replacing our White House Correspondent John Roberts. The day started out very early in the morning with the president jogging on a local golf course -- it was hot, muggy and too many mosquitoes. The most we were expecting from him was a brief comment on the day’s topic -- education, and hopefully taxes -- if we were lucky.
A couple of hours later, as the presidential motorcade headed to President Bush’s first event, I received a call on my cell phone from a producer who said that a plane had just hit the World Trade Center in New York.
I honestly couldn’t believe what I had just heard and fifteen minutes later I was standing in a second grade classroom with 20 students, who were getting ready to read for the president. He was visiting Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota. I received another phone call, this time from CBS Radio Correspondent Mark Knoller. "Kia, a plane has now crashed into the second tower of the WTC, so it looks like this is deliberate. You need to ask Bush about this."
Continues.......
Read her complete account here:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/08/19/...ain519119.shtml
CBS News Producer Kia Baskerville Was With The President
WASHINGTON
(CBS) Kia Baskerville is a CBS News White House producer. She was traveling with President Bush when the terror attacks occurred on Sept. 11, 2001
"I went on the Florida trip at the last minute, replacing our White House Correspondent John Roberts. The day started out very early in the morning with the president jogging on a local golf course -- it was hot, muggy and too many mosquitoes. The most we were expecting from him was a brief comment on the day’s topic -- education, and hopefully taxes -- if we were lucky.
A couple of hours later, as the presidential motorcade headed to President Bush’s first event, I received a call on my cell phone from a producer who said that a plane had just hit the World Trade Center in New York.
I honestly couldn’t believe what I had just heard and fifteen minutes later I was standing in a second grade classroom with 20 students, who were getting ready to read for the president. He was visiting Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota. I received another phone call, this time from CBS Radio Correspondent Mark Knoller. "Kia, a plane has now crashed into the second tower of the WTC, so it looks like this is deliberate. You need to ask Bush about this."
Continues.......
Read her complete account here:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/08/19/...ain519119.shtml
Why were ALL protocols ignored on 911. Why did NORAD stand down. Why was the Pentagon, the most protected building in the World still open to attack after 2 already known attacks, at least an hour after the first attack? Why no one has been held accountable, instead given medals, promoted and given raises after 911. Why did the government stall 911 investigations and under- finance them. Why are 911 Families the basis of the 911 Truth movement after none of their questions have been adequately answered. After they sat through a farce of 911 Commission hearings, frustrated and convinced of a cover up, enough to begin a nation-wide movement. Why did WTC7 collapse in one piece in its footprint at freefall speed? Why did Rumsfeld make a gaffe that flight 93 was shot down? Why did Bush say he SAW the first attack? Why did Silverstein say a decision was made to 'pull WTC7?' Why, as more people actually 'look' at the evidence surrounding WTC change their minds, and become not only knowing , but activist members of 911 Truth?
Why have Military Generals and Servicemen, Congressmen, Legislators, physics professors, engineers, pilots, many who were on 911 duty, mental health professionals, the 911 families, and a slew of thinking coherant citizens- join the 911 Truth Movements and are active in every city in every State in the US?
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/...fact-sheet.html
4.) Should we consider a blanket restriction on firearms possession by those who either a) believe Bush knew, or insist resolutely that he didn't, based on the argument that they are so out of touch with reality as to pose a danger to their fellow citizens? (Pick the "reality basis" of your choice for purposes of this question)
5.) How should outlandish charges, or suppressed truth (again, take your pick) of this nature best be disseminated/combatted?
You are an enemy of freedom. What you are proposing is dictatorship of ideas, but worse, actions. These questions deserve no answer, because they are absolutely totalitarian. You are proposing arming only one side of the debate, for how long? You make me laugh and also be sad because
I realize you think this is real.
You are a dangerous individual to freedom and any sort of democracy.
Heard of a river in Egypt?
Well..... You cant have my freedom of speech rights, nor my right to own guns because you think one thing and I another. Explain this absurd connection to arms ownership, BTW. You are totally reaching. You want 'some' of us disarmed?
You are asking here for a consensus on that? haahahah!
For the public, look closely at this argument. If you disagree with ANY,( from here to eternity) 'official story' you deserve to be disarmed, and after you are disarmed? WTF happens next?
Bikerdad calls for a Blanket Restriction on firearms for people who think differently than He and/or the All Powerful Government Officials, both corrupt.
Even though he is uninformed and uneducated about the facts and is really a total nobody as far as a power base goes, HE just FEELS the government is right, the post fools no one.
You see how ignorance can affect your life in the New World, Partriot ACT and a fear based , law by a mob society?
A Country or citizenry under attack does not need disarmament. Nor some jack-f-wit trying to obfucate the truth, that people are finding out for themelves, day after day. But thanks for making the job easier
1.) How could/would Bush have known?
I don't think he did. Of course, I cannot prove a negative....
2.) What other national and/or world leaders are likely candidates for this knowledge?
Apparently none. Every other world leader is clean...with the likely exception of the Israeli president. Surely he knew, too.
3.) Have you heard any charges that the governing Spanish administration at the time knew of the Madrid bombings?
No, but I suppose it could be argued that bombings right before the election cycle weren't in the interest of the ruling party. Of course, I've seen it argued that bombings right before an election would be in the interest of the ruling party here. Pretty much anything that can fit a conspiracy, in the case of Bush, will be hammered in to fit the hole, whatever the shape or size.
4.) Should we consider a blanket restriction on firearms possession by those who either a) believe Bush knew, or insist resolutely that he didn't, based on the argument that they are so out of touch with reality as to pose a danger to their fellow citizens? (Pick the "reality basis" of your choice for purposes of this question)
No. I wasn't in favor of that even right before and after the Oklahoma bombings when there was a deluge of militia groups. I'll bet a poll at the time would have found that 35 percent of Republicans believed Clinton killed Vince Foster and all of his own security guards. So far, I haven't seen any violence from 911 conspiracy believers.
5.) How should outlandish charges, or suppressed truth (again, take your pick) of this nature best be disseminated/combatted?
Well, I've found that it's pretty pointless to try and "prove" anything one way or the other. Any fact one brings out to counter these sorts of arguments is usually simply disregarded (like the NORAD assertion above, I've countered that one about 10 times in the past). This type of thing isn't exclusive to 911, conspiracy theories abound. It's worse overseas than here. This German newpaper, for instance, accuses the CIA of counterfeiting US bills and blaming it on the DPRK. The whole basis for their argument is that North Korea is too poor and technologically backward country to be able to produce such high quality counterfeit notes (in spite of technology to operate an advanced ballistic missile and nuclear weapons programs). Also never mind the fact that North Korean diplomats have been caught with US counterfeit currency, and all of the other overwhelming evidence proving that the North Koreans are counterfeiting US currency. NAH! It must be the CIA that is counterfeiting our own US currency to fund secret operations around the world! Hey, maybe the counterfeit US notes from the CIA were used to purchase the demolition charges that brought down the World Trade Center!
I don't think he did. Of course, I cannot prove a negative....
2.) What other national and/or world leaders are likely candidates for this knowledge?
Apparently none. Every other world leader is clean...with the likely exception of the Israeli president. Surely he knew, too.
3.) Have you heard any charges that the governing Spanish administration at the time knew of the Madrid bombings?
No, but I suppose it could be argued that bombings right before the election cycle weren't in the interest of the ruling party. Of course, I've seen it argued that bombings right before an election would be in the interest of the ruling party here. Pretty much anything that can fit a conspiracy, in the case of Bush, will be hammered in to fit the hole, whatever the shape or size.
4.) Should we consider a blanket restriction on firearms possession by those who either a) believe Bush knew, or insist resolutely that he didn't, based on the argument that they are so out of touch with reality as to pose a danger to their fellow citizens? (Pick the "reality basis" of your choice for purposes of this question)
No. I wasn't in favor of that even right before and after the Oklahoma bombings when there was a deluge of militia groups. I'll bet a poll at the time would have found that 35 percent of Republicans believed Clinton killed Vince Foster and all of his own security guards. So far, I haven't seen any violence from 911 conspiracy believers.
5.) How should outlandish charges, or suppressed truth (again, take your pick) of this nature best be disseminated/combatted?
Well, I've found that it's pretty pointless to try and "prove" anything one way or the other. Any fact one brings out to counter these sorts of arguments is usually simply disregarded (like the NORAD assertion above, I've countered that one about 10 times in the past). This type of thing isn't exclusive to 911, conspiracy theories abound. It's worse overseas than here. This German newpaper, for instance, accuses the CIA of counterfeiting US bills and blaming it on the DPRK. The whole basis for their argument is that North Korea is too poor and technologically backward country to be able to produce such high quality counterfeit notes (in spite of technology to operate an advanced ballistic missile and nuclear weapons programs). Also never mind the fact that North Korean diplomats have been caught with US counterfeit currency, and all of the other overwhelming evidence proving that the North Koreans are counterfeiting US currency. NAH! It must be the CIA that is counterfeiting our own US currency to fund secret operations around the world! Hey, maybe the counterfeit US notes from the CIA were used to purchase the demolition charges that brought down the World Trade Center!
QUOTE(Bikerdad @ May 8 2007, 06:55 AM) 
Nothing quite like starting out with a leading topic title, eh?
Yes, especially when you seemingly neglected to mention that apparently 15% of Republicans (who believe the same thing) and 22% of non-affiliated people (who also believe the same thing) are also 'insane'.
Bikerdad, you knew this was a pointless topic, and a pointless question, you even made a joke about it in your opening line. Why on earth did you bother?
Yes, according to this Ramussen poll, democrats are more likely to believe this conspiracy theory. Your point being?
Ask a poll based on party lines on how many Americans think the world was created 6000 years ago, and I think you will find FAR more Republicans believe that insane conspiracy theory. Ask how many people think Clinton had a dozen men murdered while in office, and I bet allmost ALL of the insane conspiracy theorists would be Republicans.
Ask them how many believe Elvis is still alive or the US didn't land on the moon, and the numbers will probably be an even split among idiots from both parties.
So what?
If you actually want to debate the validity of this particular conspiracy theory, then post about it, ask valid questions and don't deliberatly bait the left in such a gross manner. Or better yet, just post on one of the existing threads on the topic.
Topic closed...
Reason: Questions to debate too disjointed. Perhaps separate them into individual topics and avoid inflammatory topic titles.
Recommended action:
If you started this topic, please contact the staff member who closed it by clicking the PM button below this post with a clear question to debate.
Helpful links:
- Starting New Topics
- Survival Guide
- The Rules
- Staff Directory
Note: This is an automated response.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.