ThinkFast: November 24, 2006
ThinkFast: November 24, 2006
“Two bombs killed 22 people in northern Iraq on Friday as the government tried to tamp down violence and head off civil war a day after Sunni-Arab insurgents killed 215 people in an attack on Baghdad’s Sadr City slum that intensified Shiite anger at the United States.”
A previously undisclosed video shot in the months before the U.S. invasion in 2003, shows Saddam Hussein and his top officers demonstrating not biological or nuclear weapons, but primitive slingshots, Molotov cocktails, and crossbows.
Government whistle-blowers are facing increased retaliation for speaking out. “In the four years before the terrorist attacks, whistle-blowers filed an average of 690 reprisal complaints…annually. Since the attacks, an average of 835 complaints have been filed each year, a 21% increase.”
16,000: Number of single mothers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, “a number that military experts say is unprecedented.” A total of 155,000 women have served in both conflicts.
Leaked drug company memo: Sen. Rick Santorum’s (R-PA) loss “creates a big hole we will need to fill” and “we now have fewer allies in the Senate.”
Twenty states plus the District of Columbia now have requirements for using alternative energy, and two others states — Illinois and Vermont — have non-binding goals on using renewable energy sources.
And finally: Happy Black Friday! Retailers are open longer than ever this year, taking advantage of the fact that “once dinner is over, many families are looking for some kind of entertainment.” But not all shoppers are excited. “I should have stayed in bed and shopped online,” said Eric Gordon of Albany, NY.
What did we miss? Let us know in the comments section?
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Something you missed:
Republicans have eliminated hunger in the United States. Hence forward, no one in the United States will go to bed hungry.
“But they may experience ‘very low food security.’â€
Yes. This is for real: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2006/ 11/ 15/ AR2006111501621.html
November 24th, 2006 at 10:05 amLeaked drug company memo: Sen. Rick Santorum’s (R-PA) loss “creates a big hole we will need to fill†and “we now have fewer allies in the Senate.â€
I’m glad to hear that they have fewer allies in the Senate. Maybe we can do something about National Healthcare. Well, before they manage to fill that void they mentioned…
November 24th, 2006 at 10:05 amAnd finally: Happy Black Friday!
Another advantage of rejecting Christianity – no commercialized holidays in which one must go into debt to buy gadgets for one’s loved ones to prove said love…
November 24th, 2006 at 10:08 amExactly what is the death threshold in Iraq before it is officially a civil war?
November 24th, 2006 at 10:13 amWell folks, it looks like my posts are not going to show up today. sorry.
November 24th, 2006 at 10:16 amBriseadh na Faire,
There you go again, trying to educate TP readers with links to news stories.
Silly man.
November 24th, 2006 at 10:27 am;)
Well folks, it looks like my posts are not going to show up today. sorry.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — November 24, 2006 @ 10:16 am
If this one got through, then there must be something in the formatting of the others that is upsetting the spam filter. Odd.
November 24th, 2006 at 10:27 am“We now have fewer allies in the Senate,” says the internal memo, obtained by The Washington Post. “Thus, there is greater risk over the next two years that bad amendments will be offered to pending legislation.” The company’s primary concerns are bills that would allow more imported drugs and would force price competition for drugs bought under Medicare.”
And price competition is a bad thing? Seems the drug companies have been gouging the US public for a long time. Would be nice to have them face actual competition in pricing like most any other industry (except the price fixing oil companies )
Competition is a good thing.
November 24th, 2006 at 10:31 amBnF,
Gotta stop swearing so much.;)
Leaked drug company memo: Sen. Rick Santorum’s (R-PA) loss “creates a big hole we will need to fill†and “we now have fewer allies in the Senate.â€
Best description of Santorum I have heard yet. A big hole.
November 24th, 2006 at 10:34 amCompetition is a good thing.
Comment by Wayne — November 24, 2006 @ 10:31 am
Especially among elected officials : )
November 24th, 2006 at 10:35 amLeaked drug company memo: Sen. Rick Santorum’s (R-PA) loss “creates a big hole we will need to fill†and “we now have fewer allies in the Senate.â€
Hopefully the Democrats will have the good sense not to let former congressman Billy Tauzin, or any other lobbyist from Big Pharma, anywhere near Capitol Hill. He’s the reason that the government is not allowed to negotiate for lower Medicare drug prices. Nothing they want is good for Americans, just themselves.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The crisis we face in our healthcare system is not that it costs too much, it’s that they charge too much. If ours is supposed to be “the best healthcare system in the world”, then why isn’t it affordable for everyone? To me, that would go a long toward toward justifying calling it “the best in the world”.
And there is one and only one reason why they charge so much, and it goes against everything this country is supposed to be about: Greed. Why does our Congress sanction greed on such a life-threatening scale?
November 24th, 2006 at 10:38 amIsn’t it time we demanded the press define Civil War instead of constantly telling us we’re “on the verge” of it?
November 24th, 2006 at 10:41 amIndeed Santorum was a big loss for the pharmaceutical compaies. I wonder if they advised on the last minute “inside the wrestling ring” desperate commercial that didn’t pay off.
November 24th, 2006 at 10:43 amThe world burns while America shops!
November 24th, 2006 at 10:44 amEspecially among elected officials : )
— unbelievable
Good to see the Republican’s self-boasted “bulletproof” gerimandering was not as”bulletproof” as they claimed, hehe.
November 24th, 2006 at 10:44 amWhy does our Congress sanction greed on such a life-threatening scale?
It’s the power of corruption, my friend, like with the oil industry lobby.
November 24th, 2006 at 10:45 amGood to see the Republican’s self-boasted “bulletproof†gerimandering was not asâ€bulletproof†as they claimed, hehe.
Comment by Wayne — November 24, 2006 @ 10:44 am
Yeah – a painful reminder to them that it is still We The People who own the country.
You know, I bet that the real number of votes against the neocons was actually considerably higher once you factor out all their gerrymandering, Diebolding, and voting fraud tricks…
I still feel a sense of relief that we averted a very dark path thanks to the voters who voted on November 7th.
November 24th, 2006 at 10:52 amPoor Saddam…
All he asked for was sharks with frickin’ laser beams attached to their foreheads and what did he get? Slingshots and crossbows.
November 24th, 2006 at 10:53 amAssault on Iraqi Civilians Is Deadliest Since 2003
[snip]
One lawmaker allied with Sadr, however, said he and others would withdraw their support from Maliki unless he cancels a scheduled meeting next week with President Bush in protest of the decaying security situation, the Associated Press reported. Sadr’s support is critical to Maliki’s government.
[snip]
The carnage spoke of the deepening sectarian divide and the dread that has engulfed the capital. “No one believes that any Shiite would kill their Shiite brothers. It’s the Sunnis and the Americans who did this,” said Kareem Hendul Miyahem, 40, a driver.
Tabour, like so many other Shiites, was thinking about revenge.
“If I catch a terrorist, I will not kill him with a weapon. I will not turn him over to the government,” he said. “I’ll catch him and cut him to pieces and drink his blood until the last drop.”
November 24th, 2006 at 10:57 amBnF — We pulled your comment out of the spam filter (not sure why it was caught), so it should show up in a few minutes. Sorry about that!
November 24th, 2006 at 10:59 amThe world burns while America shops!
Comment by johnny — November 24, 2006 @ 10:44 am
How true…
I tried something a couple summers ago. I boycotted as much advertizing as possible. Mostly by changing the channel or station when an ad was aired. Partly by refusing to ‘browse’ the aisles in a store and instead only go to the specific things that I was there to buy.
Not only was I spending less money on crap I didn’t really need, but I found that my teeth actually were white enough, my car actually clean enough, and my clothes actually fashionable enough. Advertizing doesn’t just sell us products, it sells us an image. An unrealistic and unattainable image meant to keep us perpetually buying the next product to come along.
We are indeed sheep.
November 24th, 2006 at 11:00 amExactly what is the death threshold in Iraq before it is officially a civil war?
Comment by Jeffrey Stewart — November 24, 2006 @ 10:13 am
Of course by any rational, accepted definition of civil war, Iraq is in a civil war and has been for quite some time. But the Decider-in-Chief and his propagandists get to define and redefine what the term means as necessary, They are creating new realities.
November 24th, 2006 at 11:01 amA previously undisclosed video shot in the months before the U.S. invasion in 2003, shows Saddam Hussein and his top officers demonstrating not biological or nuclear weapons, but primitive slingshots, Molotov cocktails, and crossbows.
Slingshots, the weapon of mass destruction, for birds, if you can hit the bird and use more than one rock.
If they had wmds why in the heck talk about arming the population with slingshots and crossbows? Another proof that Bush, Cheney, Dumbsfeld and the rest of the bush appologists are liars. As if we need anymore.
Like the firing of Rumsfeld, Bush lied before the election.
Also from reports that Rumsfeld was devistated and wastaken by supprise by the announcement, Bush lied again, when he admited lying, but had “planned” with Rumsfeld his resigning from the post.
Bush will have his legacy, as the Liar President.
November 24th, 2006 at 11:03 amExactly what is the death threshold in Iraq before it is officially a civil war?
Comment by Jeffrey Stewart — November 24, 2006 @ 10:13 am
I’m sure it’s in some administration-sanctioned study that Bush & Co. nevertheless decided to ignore.
November 24th, 2006 at 11:06 amAnd what, exactly is Maliki’s plan for “tamping” down violence?
November 24th, 2006 at 11:10 amReleasing the hounds?
Wayne #23 – My vote would be the Dumbass President.
November 24th, 2006 at 11:13 amAdvertizing doesn’t just sell us products, it sells us an image. An unrealistic and unattainable image meant to keep us perpetually buying the next product to come along.
We are indeed sheep.
Comment by unbelievable — November 24, 2006 @ 11:00 am
Your observation also fits advertising for products that have been around for many years. All you have to do is notice how many products, especially food, that have newly styled packaging that boasts such claims as “New look, same great taste!” Anybody who is a regular consumer of said product couldn’t give a damn that it has a new package. Anybody who isn’t a regular consumer isn’t (well, shouldn’t) going to buy it just because it has bold colors and graphics that jump out at you.
November 24th, 2006 at 11:13 amThe world burns while America shops!
Comment by johnny — November 24, 2006 @ 10:44 am
That statement sums up what I witnessed on the news this morning.
I watched these incredibly horrific images from Iraq, and in the next moment, there we were, lined up at 3:00 in the f*cking morning to buy a g*damn X-box!!!!!
You elect the government that you DESERVE!!!!!
November 24th, 2006 at 11:22 amComment by Wayne A. Schneider — November 24, 2006 @ 10:38 am
Wayne,
I’ve often heard one of the chief reasons prescription medication costs so much is due to the high price of advertising. It’s bad enough to see ads on TV, but I got a good laugh earlier this year when I took my daughter to the doctor. As the Dr. was examining her, I noticed a little clip on her stethoscope that said, simply, “Singulair.” A tiny billboard on a piece of medical equipment. Gotta love it.
Thanks to the ads we are faced with, gone are the days that we go to the Dr. and they perform an exam and tell us the medication we need. Now we go to the Dr. and tell them what we need.
I do wonder if this newfound control by the patients has not rubbed off on the Dr.’s in other ways. At my last physical exam, the Dr. asked me if I wanted to have bloodwork performed. I was rather shocked at my newfound level of decision-making.
November 24th, 2006 at 11:24 amAnybody who isn’t a regular consumer isn’t (well, shouldn’t) going to buy it just because it has bold colors and graphics that jump out at you.
Comment by WC — November 24, 2006 @ 11:13 am
I read somewhere that 9 out of 10 people are visually dominant (as opposed to auditory-dominance). Psychologically, I guess it’s their attempt to attract attention from people who’ve avoided blue or black packaging because it isn’t a color favorably associated with food.
Yep, it’s all a game to manipulate us to buy, buy, buy… And unfortunately, most of the time it does work. But, obviously not on those of us who are here instead of at the mega-mall fighting over the latest imported gadgets from Thailand, Phillipines and Taiwan…
November 24th, 2006 at 11:24 amFunny, I have always considered Rick Santorum to be a big hole. A great big ass-hole.
So I guess I have something in common with the drug companies.
-GSD
November 24th, 2006 at 11:25 amAnybody who isn’t a regular consumer isn’t (well, shouldn’t) going to buy it just because it has bold colors and graphics that jump out at you.
— WC
But, but, but, look at all the pretty colors…. I don’t have a blue one yet.
/end snark. =)
November 24th, 2006 at 11:26 amComment by unbelievable — November 24, 2006 @ 10:27 am
BnF — We pulled your comment out of the spam filter (not sure why it was caught), so it should show up in a few minutes. Sorry about that!
Comment by Amanda — November 24, 2006 @ 10:59 am
Well, it looks like you recovered one out of two, the second being posted within a minute or so of the first. It was a link to Senator Boxer’s petition to redeploy our troops out of Iraq, something I believe a lot of visitors to this site would be interested in.
Makes me wonder (again) if NSA is in charge of this site…sigh. Back to researching the events of 9/11. Ever notice how the intact portions of the towers crumbled to dust without offering any resistance whatsoever to the upper debris cloud? As the towers crumbled, concrete and steel offered as much resistance to the falling debris of the upper portion as the surrounding air did to free-falling debris….
November 24th, 2006 at 11:30 amI watched these incredibly horrific images from Iraq, and in the next moment, there we were, lined up at 3:00 in the f*cking morning to buy a g*damn X-box!!!!!
Comment by notimpressedwiththeUS — November 24, 2006 @ 11:22 am
Escape reality. It is easier for them to swallow the blue pill…
The Matrix is “the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth”.
November 24th, 2006 at 11:30 amCan we read between the lines at this critical juncture of hasty, perhaps frantic, top level ME meetings what it means that Malaki will not meet with Bush?
thanks
November 24th, 2006 at 11:30 amEver notice how the intact portions of the towers crumbled to dust without offering any resistance whatsoever to the upper debris cloud? As the towers crumbled, concrete and steel offered as much resistance to the falling debris of the upper portion as the surrounding air did to free-falling debris….
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — November 24, 2006 @ 11:30 am
Again, the weight of the upper portions of the buildings falling upon materials not designed to handle impact loads will do this… Concrete has no tensile strength (ever notice how it cracks? It’s supposed to fail so that the steel rebar will take over).
Drive an accelerating car into a brick wall and tell me what happens. Things get destroyed because they were not designed for impact.
Really, now that you’re done with law school, try engineering/architecture school. There’s a reason they make those of us who design buildings study it.
November 24th, 2006 at 11:40 amIf you want to nationalize health care should you not also reduce/eliminate the cost of malpractice insurance? Maybe get some aid from the government for the cost of medical school too. Just asking.
November 24th, 2006 at 11:40 amMakes me wonder (again) if NSA is in charge of this site…sigh….
Comment by Briseadh na Faire
If that were true, my friend, I’m pretty sure you and several other commenters on TP would be gone already. Just sayin’
November 24th, 2006 at 11:43 amHappy Black Friday!
Oy. What a disgusting spectacle.
Gather up all the money you would normally spend on the holidays, get your family together, pick out one or more favorite charities, and send the check (or deliver yourself for volunteering) to said charities.
November 24th, 2006 at 11:47 amIf you want to nationalize health care should you not also reduce/eliminate the cost of malpractice insurance? Maybe get some aid from the government for the cost of medical school too. Just asking.
Comment by robert — November 24, 2006 @ 11:40 am
Robert, if you truly want to understand what we think, then just ask the question without attaching your conclusions.
When you answer your own questions, you leave no room for debate, discussion or understanding. You’ve just assumed the worse case scenario and are posting your rants to insult us.
Why don’t you just go do this in Freeperville where there is no room for benefit of the doubt for those you do not understand.
November 24th, 2006 at 11:49 amThat statement sums up what I witnessed on the news this morning.
I watched these incredibly horrific images from Iraq, and in the next moment, there we were, lined up at 3:00 in the f*cking morning to buy a g*damn X-box!!!!!
You elect the government that you DESERVE!!!!!
Comment by notimpressedwiththeUS — November 24, 2006 @ 11:22 am
Our wonderful companies at work. Today Best Buy planned on handing out tickets at 4am to folks already lined up outside their stores so that some would be guaranteed a product. The stores are just as much to be blamed for all this frenzy as the consumer. Several years ago for Black Friday, Wal-Mart was advertising a 5 MP digital camera for $99 (regular price at that time was probably about $300). Later that day I was asking a friend who worked at the store about it and what a great deal it was. He said they had a grand total of 3 in stock prior to the “sale” starting.
November 24th, 2006 at 11:51 amBut, but, but, look at all the pretty colors…. I don’t have a blue one yet.
/end snark. =)
Comment by Wayne — November 24, 2006 @ 11:26 am
But…but…but…that new font that Mountain Dew is using on their cans and bottles makes my legs go weak and my heart flutter every time I look at it.
November 24th, 2006 at 11:59 amReally, now that you’re done with law school, try engineering/architecture school. There’s a reason they make those of us who design buildings study it.
Comment by unbelievable
Sorry, the WTC was designed to take a plane and not falling.
November 24th, 2006 at 11:59 amThe brick wall will offer some resistance to the car, altering the rate of acceleration. Keep going through multiple brick walls and the car will be slowed noticeably. Add rebar to those walls and the car would eventually be stopped. I didn’t study building design, but I did study physics.
And the building collapse theory doesn’t explain the explosions at the base of the buildings nor the seismic shockwaves which occured before the collapse sequence. Can you?
November 24th, 2006 at 12:07 pmSorry, the WTC was designed to take a plane and not falling.
Comment by Juan C — November 24, 2006 @ 11:59 am
They (designers) intended that the Towers could take the impact of a plane, but it obviously didn’t stand up in practice, because there is more to a plane hitting a building than just the impact.
The Trade Towers were a unique design not used in any other buildings prior to their construction (there were tube steel columns along the face of the building that took most of the structural load. When these were compromised due to the uniform heat load – they failed and the tops of the buildings above these compromised areas became an accelerating load – gravity accelerates with time -that led to their collapses. The fact that the last tower hit, which was impacted lower than the first, fell first is further validation of this process).
So, the intentions of the designers were really just theories of what the buildings could handle since it had never been put into practice before . Sadly, much of the untold history of architecture is riddled with people building something, and then learning what not to do when it fails… And the reason it is untold is to keep the public from becoming fearful of such scenarios…
November 24th, 2006 at 12:09 pmReally, now that you’re done with law school, try engineering/architecture school. There’s a reason they make those of us who design buildings study it.
unbelievable, I have really enjoyed your posts in the past, but this post seems very intolerant of you and not up to your usual good standards. Having a bad day? Also I was under the impression you were a teacher instead of an engineer. Did someone take unbelievable’s name?
November 24th, 2006 at 12:09 pmThe brick wall will offer some resistance to the car, altering the rate of acceleration. Keep going through multiple brick walls and the car will be slowed noticeably. Add rebar to those walls and the car would eventually be stopped. I didn’t study building design, but I did study physics.
But they weren’t multiple brick walls and the car was, in comparison, significantly bigger. The affect of gravity’s acceleration must be taken into consideration as well.
How much Physics did you study?
And the building collapse theory doesn’t explain the explosions at the base of the buildings nor the seismic shockwaves which occured before the collapse sequence. Can you?
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — November 24, 2006 @ 12:07 pm
Prove the explosions.
The seismic waves were the result of the planes impacting the buildings. They were huge freaking buildings… This has been substantiated by several engineers. Google it.
Besides, I really don’t understand what all of this is supposed to demonstrate exactly? That if the terrorists had managed, as they did before, to put explosives in the parking garage that George Bush did it?
November 24th, 2006 at 12:14 pmDid someone take unbelievable’s name?
Comment by Bluedahlia
She is an architect, so she probably knows most about structural mechanics than anyone of us. IMO, UnB is a as competitive as anybody to prove her points, and join with the fact that 9/11 is really sensitive issue for a lot of US citizens, both libs and neocons. I think BnF is going to be ok.
November 24th, 2006 at 12:15 pmIf you want to nationalize health care should you not also reduce/eliminate the cost of malpractice insurance? Maybe get some aid from the government for the cost of medical school too. Just asking.
— robert
Most doctors are at least 100k in debt by the time they finish school, unless they have a very rich parent footing the bill. So yeah,I think there is a problem with “capitalism” in the college arena. Bush has made cuts and changes to the rules that make it much harder for college students to afford to go to college. Thank your right wing Republicans for that Robert.
Infant mortality in the US is one of the strongest arguments for nationalized healthcare. The US has and atoundingly high infant mortality rate in comparison to other industrial nations. The lowest rates go to those with nationalized healthcare.
November 24th, 2006 at 12:20 pmUnbeliveable, sorry if i did not present my question clearly. Would you agree that would be a good course of action? If not, why? Just a question.
November 24th, 2006 at 12:22 pmThanks Juan for enlightening me. Just bothers me to see two great posters fighting. (my mistake, they are discussing opposing viewpoints ;-) ) I learn something new about the people posting as musch as world events here. That is one of the things I like about this site.
November 24th, 2006 at 12:22 pmBesides, I really don’t understand what all of this is supposed to demonstrate exactly? That if the terrorists had managed, as they did before, to put explosives in the parking garage that George Bush did it?
Comment by unbelievable
I think thats exactly the point. Sorry to meddle between your discussion, but the question is why do they wanted (if) to take down WTC? Now, imagine all the suspicious vans, pizza deliverers, new janitors, etc, to place those explosives. I agree with some points of the theory, but some of them seem really shady and improbable.
November 24th, 2006 at 12:23 pmunbelievable, I have really enjoyed your posts in the past, but this post seems very intolerant of you and not up to your usual good standards. Having a bad day?
And this is rather judgmental of you. No, I am not having a bad day. I’m just not prone to sugar-coat stuff.
This was not written in the tone you read it. Perhaps it is you who is having the bad day to assume I was being intolerant? I wasn’t. It was a joke.
Also I was under the impression you were a teacher instead of an engineer. Did someone take unbelievable’s name?
Comment by Bluedahlia — November 24, 2006 @ 12:09 pm
I was an Architect with degrees and practice in both structural engineering (towers, actually) and a variety of architectural projects for 14 years prior to becoming a teacher. I teach Architecture, by the way.
November 24th, 2006 at 12:23 pmThanks Juan for enlightening me.
Comment by Bluedahlia
Get out of here. :)))
Just bothers me to see two great posters fighting.
November 24th, 2006 at 12:26 pmBy the way, Worfeus is a great poster that, I guess, since a torrid discussion I ve never seen him again.
IMO, UnB is a as competitive as anybody to prove her points, and join with the fact that 9/11 is really sensitive issue for a lot of US citizens, both libs and neocons.
Thanks Juan. The debate can get exhaustive sometimes. But my concern is that is people do not understand how buildings can be destroyed, that they will not survive future attacks.
The reason I am firm on this issue is because I don’t want people to think, for instance, that steel must melt to fail, and therefore, there is no reason to worry about escape methods for living and working in super-high rise buildings.
People died in the Trade Towers because they were vulnerable. I don’t want people to be paranoid – but certainly aware that there are risks in such situations.
I think BnF is going to be ok.
Comment by Juan C — November 24, 2006 @ 12:15 pm
LOL. Really. :)
November 24th, 2006 at 12:28 pmI think thats exactly the point. Sorry to meddle between your discussion, but the question is why do they wanted (if) to take down WTC?
Feel free to join in the discussion…
People who knew him have said that Osama wanted to take out the beacon of American financial strength. That his goal was to collapse our financial structure – apparently both figuratively and literally.
Now, imagine all the suspicious vans, pizza deliverers, new janitors, etc, to place those explosives. I agree with some points of the theory, but some of them seem really shady and improbable.
Comment by Juan C — November 24, 2006 @ 12:23 pm
I guess that’s the main problem with how the government handled the situation. Theories are all we have at this point… Though I think we do have a lot of information that just logical does or doesn’t follow a trail of possibility.
November 24th, 2006 at 12:34 pmI am quite sorry if I offended you, unbelievable. It definately was not my intention. Like I said earlier, I have enjoyed your posts.
November 24th, 2006 at 12:36 pmwhoa… what do you mean by ‘prove’?
Comment by james risser — November 24, 2006 @ 12:30 pm
Are you serious?
Prove, as in, before you can introduce something as a fact to validate your case, you must first prove it existed or happened. That kind of ‘prove’.
Bush did it? Bush who couldn’t find oil drilling in Texas could pull off this? Sure.
November 24th, 2006 at 12:41 pmThat his goal was to collapse our financial structure – apparently both figuratively and literally.
Now, thats where my dirty mind comes in. Almost every company installed in WTC made, one day before, a lot of transactions. Now, OBL must know a lot of financial transactions, he is one of the richest man in the world, which btw must have stocks in several american companies. So anyone planning to do that, knew corporations wont suffer a bit: just pressing enter and bum! your operations are run in another building/city/country. Now…days following 9/11 the Dow Jones and Nasdaq went up. No super wealthy entreperneur died that day…I mean, you can say, well, its all coincidence…yeah, these guys (Hawks and Islam fundamentalists) dont mind at all if 600,000 civilians or 3,000 soldiers are dead, at least they dont seem to show it. Why would they care about other 3,000 innocents if I can engage actions that makes US occupy the 2nd largest oil reservoirs?
November 24th, 2006 at 12:44 pmI am quite sorry if I offended you, unbelievable. It definately was not my intention. Like I said earlier, I have enjoyed your posts.
Comment by Bluedahlia — November 24, 2006 @ 12:36 pm
Thank you.
It’s funny, I’m putting together a presentation for my students on Frank Lloyd Wright. It’s amazing how even a man like him made so many mistakes in his designs. Personally, I think we build Towers of Babel with these super skyscrapers that are not in the best interest of humanity. What’s that saying about pride going before a fall? And that’s what these ridiculously tall buildings are really about – who can be the tallest…. I don’t think we should be surprised that they are, in turn, vulnerable to failure.
November 24th, 2006 at 12:47 pmBush did it? Bush who couldn’t find oil drilling in Texas could pull off this? Sure.
Comment by unbelievable
I agree, james. Bush doesnt know what happened IMO. His dad, Negroponte, Kissinger, Wolfowitz…I mean, really bright, maquiavelic a-holes, could do it.
November 24th, 2006 at 12:50 pmWhy would they care about other 3,000 innocents if I can engage actions that makes US occupy the 2nd largest oil reservoirs?
Comment by Juan C
Wow…I changed the person like 3 times.
November 24th, 2006 at 12:51 pmWhy would they care about other 3,000 innocents if I can engage actions that makes US occupy the 2nd largest oil reservoirs?
Comment by Juan C — November 24, 2006 @ 12:44 pm
This is where, I think, the religious fanaticism enters the discourse…
The stuff about his god being on his side and the ‘infidels’ deserving to die… Kind of like Bush thinking his god was/is on his side and that the ‘infidels’ deserve to die…
November 24th, 2006 at 12:51 pmThere are lots of theories about what happened on 9/11. What is wrong with the theory that two towers designed to take the impact of a 727 (the largest aircraft at the time of their construction) were hit instead by considerably larger aircraft (767s I believe) and as a result the building structure failed. As far as I know, this is the only one supported by the evidence.
Is Bush guilty? Yes. His negligence is well documented- and in the coming years, we will see more people and evidence coming forward. I doubt we’ll have the pleasure of an impeachment, much less trial and conviction. But I am convinced history will not look well upon this president or his administration.
November 24th, 2006 at 12:52 pm#65 I agree.
November 24th, 2006 at 12:56 pmAt least with greed you can see a fairly predictable outcome. With religious fanaticism, you never know how variable x will affect variable y, or sometimes even why.
His dad, Negroponte, Kissinger, Wolfowitz…I mean, really bright, maquiavelic a-holes, could do it.
Comment by Juan C — November 24, 2006 @ 12:50 pm
I can’t disagree with that. They are vile people consumed with delusions of grandeur. Maybe they financed it or convinced Junior to look the other way – but I’m saying that if the terrorists had also managed to park a truck bomb in the parking garage, it doesn’t prove it – or anything besides the fact that they (Al Qaeda) made sure they would succeed this time. They must have learned something from their previous efforts.
November 24th, 2006 at 12:57 pmOne thing, and then I’m off this topic because I really can’t contribute more than speculation:
Was it the stated goal of OBL to bring down the WTC towers? Or was the collapse of the towers just a giant surprise bonus?
November 24th, 2006 at 12:57 pmdrtomaso,
You and I have the same idea about the towers collapse.
November 24th, 2006 at 12:59 pmRobert, just to be accurate here, we do not need to “nationalize” healthcare. A government-managed, single-payer health plan is no more “nationalization” than Medicare is nationalization for seniors. All it means is that we cut out the middleman. All citizens have a maximum of choice. They can choose to go anywhere they want for their care. The only difference is that the government pays the provider rather than the insurance industry. The overhead for Medicare is about 3 to 4%, while the overhead for the insurance industry runs at about 15% or more. Doctors don’t lose anything and the pharmaceutacal industry gets marginally less profits, but it doesn’t have to spend for all the advertising, so it may be close to a wash. The only people who lose are the insurance industry, but they have other sources of profit. They can make their money off fire, cars, homes, etc. but no longer hold us hostage for our healthcare.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:03 pmi argue, i do not prove, because i am not given the power to prove, that george bush and his crime family committed the crime.
Comment by james risser — November 24, 2006 @ 12:55 pm
Sure you are. But I guess it’s just easier to play the victim and come up with conspiracy theories. Whatever works for you. Just don’t expect me to take you seriously when you can’t prove things you assert as facts.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:03 pmThe only people who lose are the insurance industry, but they have other sources of profit. They can make their money off fire, cars, homes, etc. but no longer hold us hostage for our healthcare.
Comment by Bluedog49
That’s why trying to go to a single-payer system will be an all out war. The insurance companies don’t want to lose their cut of the money.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:05 pmSure, the machiavellian idiots have a lot to benefit from a terrorist attack on US soil- but could they plan it, orchestrate it, and pull it off so quietly? I really dont think so. Further look at all their planning for Iraq- its the same bunch of idiots- and they got everything wrong, wrong, wrong. Greeted as liberators? Wrong. War pays for itself? Wrong. Stable democracy? Wrong. Friendly to the US? Wrong. Ally against Iran? Wrong. Out in 6 months or less? Incredibly wrong.
Its much more plausible that they just crippled our defense and intelligence agencies so that we wouldnt be prepared for when it eventually did happen. Based on the above it appears more incompetance than malice- but either way the results are the same.
In sum, every nation on earth suffers from Terrorism in some form. That the US remained terrorist free for so long is really a statistical outlier. The challenge is we have to come up with a better way of dealing with terrorism than we have so far- militarism simply is unsustaneable, inappropriate and ineffective. We had the most effective military in the world on 9/10, and we still had it on 9/12. The military will not keep you safe from terrorists. Good human intel will. Good police work will. Good disaster services will help put things back in order when the first two fail. An even handed foreign policy reduces the nutcases’ appeal and decreases the odds they will find the support necessary to attack us.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:06 pmAt least with greed you can see a fairly predictable outcome. With religious fanaticism, you never know how variable x will affect variable y, or sometimes even why.
Comment by Bluedahlia — November 24, 2006 @ 12:56 pm
Good point. Feelings and beliefs are not things that we can measure or trust as reliable, because they are not based upon anything concrete – and frequently based upon rationizations to fit the reality that the person wishes existed rather than the reality that does exist.
Personally, I think my own stint with organized religion began to fall apart when I started to accept the reality that exists – because it is incompatable with the horrors people commit in the name of their faith.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:08 pmKind of like Bush thinking his god was/is on his side and that the ‘infidels’ deserve to die…
Comment by unbelievable
Fanatism is only to drive ignorant masses to the place where you want them to be. If OBL or any islamic fanatic leader blew himself, then Id probably say he was at least congruent. The same thing with Bush and Cheney. But they dont cuz they just want to hold power. So, religious motivations are only for the ignorant mass (american and terrorists). IMO, the only motivation behind this kind of actions 9/11, terrorism, Iraq war is to hold power and to keep corporations (oil and war) happy and with good numbers. You and I, just get the ol´ Muslims are dangerous, and terrorists get the “americans are infidels”. So, no, there is no religious motivation behind 9/11 in my opinion.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:10 pmThe only people who lose are the insurance industry, but they have other sources of profit. They can make their money off fire, cars, homes, etc. but no longer hold us hostage for our healthcare.
Comment by Bluedog49 — November 24, 2006 @ 1:03 pm
As someone who works for the government, we would want to state up front that our National Healthcare policy won’t be riddled with obscene amounts of unnecessary amounts of paperwork. :)
I loved your post. It is the crux of the issue. It’s the profits that greedy insurance companies are fighting to keep – to our detriment.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:12 pmSo I guess you won’t be buying any more birthday presents to show your love? =)
November 24th, 2006 at 1:15 pmOne thing, and then I’m off this topic because I really can’t contribute more than speculation:
November 24th, 2006 at 1:17 pmComment by Zooey
You really contribute, Zoo. Stay. :)
Thanks, unbelievable. I agree, but I also think that when Doctors are polled these days, they tell you that the insurance-based system also requires lots of paperwork. I’m not sure there would be more with single-payer. As Krugman has pointed out, currently there are tens of thousands of people employed for the purpose of preventing access. Eliminating this aspect of the system would eliminate some of the paperwork.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:17 pmAn even handed foreign policy reduces the nutcases’ appeal and decreases the odds they will find the support necessary to attack us.
Comment by drtomaso — November 24, 2006 @ 1:06 pm
Excellent and logical post. I share your perspective on this. That 9/11 was most likely the result of inaction and not actions on the behalf of the neocons.
Plus, they are too willing to stab one another in the back for someone not to have confessed to something egregious by now…
November 24th, 2006 at 1:22 pmFurther look at all their planning for Iraq- its the same bunch of idiots- and they got everything wrong, wrong, wrong. Greeted as liberators? Wrong. War pays for itself? Wrong. Stable democracy? Wrong. Friendly to the US? Wrong. Ally against Iran? Wrong. Out in 6 months or less? Incredibly wrong.
Thats what they want you to think, I guess. I think they are doing swimmingly in Iraq. As long as you have the country divided, killing each other, killing american soldiers (they couldnt care less), the iraqi people cant fight for their resources, to ask why US is building the largest US embassy in the world, why Oil MInistry was the only government building in Iraq that was secured tightly, why there is not a visible Timetable, etc. Just ask yourself this: Why oil pipes arent being hit? They are just blowing holy places. US and oil/war corporations are doing swimmingly.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:23 pmSo, no, there is no religious motivation behind 9/11 in my opinion.
Comment by Juan C — November 24, 2006 @ 1:10 pm
I think Bush and Osama both believe the drivel they sell. To me, it’s what makes them so much more dangerous than those who use religion to control the masses, but don’t actually believe it themselves. I think that they justify “not dying” so that they can continue to lead the masses in their self-defined “holy” crusades, as their respective gods desire…
November 24th, 2006 at 1:26 pmSo I guess you won’t be buying any more birthday presents to show your love? =)
Comment by Zep Tepi — November 24, 2006 @ 1:15 pm
What do birthdays have to do with Christianity?
I usually make gifts.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:28 pmNo James, I have facts. You just ignore them. Like I said – whatever gets you through.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:31 pmYou really contribute, Zoo. Stay. :)
Comment by Juan C
Thanks Juan, you’re a sweetie. Do you know if it was the goal of OBL to bring down the WTC, and/or any other buildings he planned on hitting?
November 24th, 2006 at 1:32 pmWhat does the commercialization of Christmas have to do with Christianity?
Making gifts I agree with..Yet above you make it seem as if Christianity is what makes people buy gifts of love when that is not so. It capitalism that has commercialized christmas =) And not vice versa as in your black friday post.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:34 pmAs Krugman has pointed out, currently there are tens of thousands of people employed for the purpose of preventing access. Eliminating this aspect of the system would eliminate some of the paperwork.
Comment by Bluedog49 — November 24, 2006 @ 1:17 pm
Well, I say let’s get a National Healthcare policy, like the majority of Americans want, and figure it out as we go along : ).
If we’re wrong, which clearly all other Industrialized Nations doing it effectivle don’t indicate that we would be, we can always go back. I’d rather try it than not try it for any of the silly reasons the Insurance Companies are spouting.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:34 pm#85-
I agree with much of what you state- and I’ve heard this argument before.
I simply cannot believe the Neo con’s agenda was to essentialy give Iran a puppet state in Iraq. The US will get none of that oil- its not gonna happen- thank GB Jr for that one. Call me a ‘defeatocrat’ but the US simply cannot win in Iraq. All we can do is foot the bill for the guys wearing the blue helmets who might be able to, if they come from Pakistan or wherever. Our grandkids’ grandkids are gonna be footing the bill for Iraq, and justly so.
Can neocon’s really have been that stupid? Yes. Was it really just a plot to look incompetent? I guess its possible, but I doubt its gonna prove to be very effective. For decades, the neocons will be remembered as ‘those idiots who cost us ____’, where you can fill the blank in with almost any factoid that formerly made the US great.
The US is not going to attack Iran short of them nuking us- the party that votes for that war, on top of the vastly unpopular Iraq war will guarantee themselves minority party status for the next two decades.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:39 pmIt’s amazing to me that anyone even begins to accept the official explanation. Really. Just months before this happened, Payne Stewarts private jet was heading north in the midwest when control towers lost contact. Within 5 minutes, there were two F-16’s straddling the jet close enough to report that everyone had passed out. If the answer is that NORAD was standing down for war games, then the question should be why, after 55 separate warnings from the FAA and the Aug. 6th CIA memo, someone would have ordered NORAD to stand down. There’s a chain of command people. Why don’t we know who gave these orders and why? Why don’t we know why the few jets which did scramble were not armed? Why don’t we know why they scrambled 40 minutes late? I’m not blaming anyone or even positing a conspiracy theory here. I’m just saying that there are questions which should be simple to answer and they haven’t been answered.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:40 pmDo you know if it was the goal of OBL to bring down the WTC, and/or any other buildings he planned on hitting?
Comment by Zooey
In fact, as far as I know, he had never said: “WE did it. It went perfect” and that makes me doubt a little cuz these guys really promote their killings. There is a theory of a french journalist that says, as Bluedog said, that there was a center of information of intelligent agencies in those buildings, so they had to fall. But its all speculation, thanks to the ambiguity of the 9/11 Commission report.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:41 pmNo James, I have facts. You just ignore them. Like I said – whatever gets you through.
well then, unbeli, you wouldn’t know a legal fact regarding criminal investigation of motive and intent if it bit you in the ass. i admit above that you may have structural facts on buildings and seismic data, but, you have no facts regarding the criminal investigation. zilch. nada. not one.
if you have facts on why bush should be removed from the list of suspects, please enlighten us with your true pearls of wisdom, oh great one! i welcome facts and do not ‘ignore them’… you have, to use a non-legal term, DIDDLY SQUAT.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:41 pmunbelievable, there is a group of physicists and structural engineers touring the country giving presentations which doesn’t agree with what you just posted.
Comment by Bluedog49 — November 24, 2006 @ 1:28 pm
How much practice do they have in building design?
How much are they getting paid?
Those who have practiced tend to discredit these people for those two reasons, and tehir own experience in the real world of building design.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:42 pmIn addition, there is evidently no example of this ever happening to a steel structure building as a result of seismic activity or heat.
Comment by Bluedog49 — November 24, 2006 @ 1:28 pm
There is no other building like the trade towers that have experienced this sort of impact, so you really can’t compare. It’s not equal comparision.
A lot of academics are saying a lot of things that real engineers and architects disagree with. If it were doctors instead, personally, I’m going with the guys and gals who have experience.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:46 pmBut its all speculation, thanks to the ambiguity of the 9/11 Commission report.
Comment by Juan C
I agree with that. The 9/11 Commission Report is suspect to me now, because of the actions and statements of some of the Commission members since the report came out.
I always had the impression that the 9/11 attacks went so much better than OBL ever anticipated. And, of course, our subsequent destruction of so many of our rights and freedoms was a nice cherry on top.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:48 pmThe US will get none of that oil- its not gonna happen- thank GB Jr for that one.
The US is not going to attack Iran short of them nuking us- Comment by drtomaso
What do you mean? Halliburton already trades IRaq´s oil. Now, do you wanted to keep that oil for the US?
About Iran, when have you heard they are planning to nuke US, besides the never-ending propaganda of neocons telling US citizens who is the next enemy?
November 24th, 2006 at 1:51 pmWhat does the commercialization of Christmas have to do with Christianity?
I agree, But it doesn’t mean it hasn’t occured.
Yet above you make it seem as if Christianity is what makes people buy gifts of love when that is not so. It capitalism that has commercialized christmas =) And not vice versa as in your black friday post.
Comment by Zep Tepi — November 24, 2006 @ 1:34 pm
Yet, I don’t see many Christians protesting this. And, in fact, I see them supporting it each year until it has become the out-of-control event that it is.
I never said Christianity was the reason. I said that Christmas is now commercialized. If Christians universally don’t like it, then it wouldn’t have happened.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:52 pmi am sure unbelievable will straighten it out for you and tell you it is not possible because no one can PROVE it.
Comment by james risser — November 24, 2006 @ 1:34 pm
Does pitching a temper tantrum like this usually get mommy to give in and buy you what you want?
That’s about your maturity level.
Reminds me why I usually skip your posts.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:54 pmThe US is not going to attack Iran short of them nuking us- the party that votes for that war, on top of the vastly unpopular Iraq war will guarantee themselves minority party status for the next two decades.
Comment by drtomaso — November 24, 2006 @ 1:39 pm
I think you’re right… I just hope that the politicians do too…
November 24th, 2006 at 1:57 pmIt’s amazing to me that anyone even begins to accept the official explanation.
Comment by Bluedog49 — November 24, 2006 @ 1:40 pm
I don’t accept the Official Explanation. Which is no less absurd than accept the Conspiracy Theory either.
I formed my own explanation based on 14 years designing buildings.
November 24th, 2006 at 1:58 pmI formed my own explanation based on 14 years designing buildings.
Comment by unbelievable
about the buildings. What about the NORAD failure, the tapes missing, the evaporated passengers in the Pentangon crash, the blury “plane” hitting it, etc?
November 24th, 2006 at 2:05 pmunbelievable, from your past posts, I think critical thinking is important to you. That’s why I suggest you spend some time over at Project Censored (www.projectcensored.org)
November 24th, 2006 at 2:05 pmso the question may not be as silly as you seem to think it is.
Comment by Bluedog49 — November 24, 2006 @ 1:55 pm
No, I want to know how much the people on the circuit are being paid to promote their opinions.
Just because I there is no proof for anyone but Osama’s boys taking down the towers doesn’t mean I think Bush is innocent.
He allowed this to happen. That is criminal. But that is as far as I can blame him at this point. So far, a lot of random pieces of information that could be coincidental don’t yet spell conspiracy to me. Sorry, I’m a skeptic.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:05 pm*yawn*
unbeli,
first, i wonder what your life is like if you confuse passion with temper. problem with daddy you would care to talk about in your next therapy session?
second, i am banned so the number of posts of mine are indeed limited and your reading them or not is as meaningless as the bugs crawling through your hair. i do my best to get past the ban when i find it important enough to do so–of when i feel like it.
third, from the time i posted that to the time you posted this, you did do just as i claimed you would! you explained it all away, proving me correct about your temperment.
and fourth, you are meaningless to me but i am concerned that people such as yourself misuse the language, create straw-men, and claim some domain knowledge, in your case, architecture, as a way to claim expertise in areas where you are truly deficient. that is the worse kind of hypocrisy and ‘untruthiness’ and i will do everything i can to quelch you and your co-bugs that do so… i care for language, and you.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:07 pmproblem with daddy you would care to talk about in your next therapy session?
Comment by james risser
Hey, james…was that comment really necessary?
If she is confronting you and making unnecessary comments too, be wiser and let it go. Now, will you please address my inquiry at post #116? Thanks.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:11 pmAgain, unbelievable, I have formulated no conclusions at all about any conspiracies or blame. None. But, I have sat and listened to a number of phyisists, explosive experts and structural engineers who are working for a NON-PROFIT group which questions a number of official explanations surrounding the incident. That’s all. There is no book-publishing deal and no real profit to be made traveling around giving talks at universities for free admission. I payed nothing for the right to sit and listen to them. That should mean something to you.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:11 pmfirst, i wonder what your life is like if you confuse passion with temper. problem with daddy you would care to talk about in your next therapy session?—- james risser
WTF is wrong with you? You can not debate facts so you revert to attacks, like a right wing troll?
sheesh
Take a chill pill james
November 24th, 2006 at 2:13 pmWhat about the NORAD failure, the tapes missing, the evaporated passengers in the Pentangon crash, the blury “plane†hitting it, etc?
Comment by Juan C — November 24, 2006 @ 2:05 pm
My opinion on the towers doesn’t automatically impact my opinions on other aspects of what happened that day. You can’t logically conclude that because I believe the towers fell due to the planes crashing into them, that I must think that what happened at the Pentagon was the same.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:16 pm#71, Thanks for the explaination and insite. I agree there needs to be major overhauls in the current system.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:18 pmThanks, james…
November 24th, 2006 at 2:18 pmYou can’t logically conclude that because I believe the towers fell due to the planes crashing into them, that I must think that what happened at the Pentagon was the same.
Comment by unbelievable
I conclude nothing. Thats why I asked.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:19 pmBut, I have sat and listened to a number of phyisists, explosive experts and structural engineers who are working for a NON-PROFIT group which questions a number of official explanations surrounding the incident. That’s all.
But what are they getting? A paycheck? Fame?
Seriously – I am a skeptic. I want to know people’s motivations.
That’s great if they are just questioning what happened. I support that. But unless they are being scientific and not emotional about what happened, I find it hard to pay attention.
There is no book-publishing deal and no real profit to be made traveling around giving talks at universities for free admission. I payed nothing for the right to sit and listen to them. That should mean something to you.
Comment by Bluedog49 — November 24, 2006 @ 2:11 pm
But it doesn’t. There are other things people get from it. I’m going to be skeptical of people who reject what I consider – from experience – to be reality-based.
Nothing personal. I just am not convinced that this was more than negligence.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:21 pmUnbelievable, I’m pretty sure you realize that even though there was vast devistation, the frames of a number of steel-framed buildings were still standing after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki blasts. If a number of fires on two or three floors were enough to devistate a 47-story building, how on earth could ANYTHING be standing after a nuclear explosion? Something to think about.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:22 pmOh My bad I guess I misread what you typed..That rejecting Christianity is rejecting commercialized holidays.
Huh? Wha? Silly me! Jesus turned over the tables of the money changers because he was for Usury!!
November 24th, 2006 at 2:22 pmThanks for the discussion. Im having lunch now. :)
November 24th, 2006 at 2:24 pmHas it ever occurred to anyone of the remarkable coincidence of Aldous Huxley dying the same day as JFK? I thought it worthy enough to investigate how these two parallel events represent more than anyone would think.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:24 pmAbout 9/11, all I can add is that I know, from my former CG who was at the Pentagon that day, that a plane did, in fact, crash in to it.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:25 pmWTF is wrong with you? You can not debate facts so you revert to attacks, like a right wing troll?
sheesh
Take a chill pill james
Comment by Wayne — November 24, 2006 @ 2:13 pm
I’ve stopped reading his posts. He has nothing relevent to say.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:25 pmunbelievable: “But what are they getting? A paycheck? Fame?”
No paycheck. It is evidently on their dollar. And, since you’ll have to go to Project Censored to find them, no fame. My assumption is that they believe they are providing a public service.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:27 pmI conclude nothing. Thats why I asked.
Comment by Juan C — November 24, 2006 @ 2:19 pm
Oh, okay… sorry, I thought you did.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:28 pmhow on earth could ANYTHING be standing after a nuclear explosion? Something to think about.
Comment by Bluedog49 — November 24, 2006 @ 2:22 pm
Well, Japan was hit with atomic bombs… Which I am not an expert on. And I think it would depend on many variables as to why some things were not impacted as much as others. I haven’t studied it to have an official opinion – but it’s really not the same scenario that you can compare.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:33 pmJesus turned over the tables of the money changers because he was for Usury!!
Comment by Zep Tepi — November 24, 2006 @ 2:22 pm
Then too bad Christianity the organized religion has very little to do with Jesus’s philosophies… We might have fewer teen pregnancies and drug use because mom and dad would be able to spend time with their offspring.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:35 pmComment by unbelievable — November 24, 2006 @ 12:34 pm
Here we agree. The greatest crime ever committed on American soil and there was virtually no criminal investigation. There was a conclusion, “terrorists did it,” and the facts were fit around that particular theory.
I have gone through about a third of the links I have on the subject. I haven’t been able to successfully include them in a link on ThinkProgress. But I have googled the subject extensively.
Suffice to say I would love to see a true criminal investigation into the events of that day.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:37 pmI thought it worthy enough to investigate how these two parallel events represent more than anyone would think.
Comment by jurassicpork — November 24, 2006 @ 2:24 pm
Several former Presidents died on July 4th… Maybe you could look that up for us when you finish this current project?
November 24th, 2006 at 2:37 pmMy assumption is that they believe they are providing a public service.
Comment by Bluedog49 — November 24, 2006 @ 2:27 pm
Maybe they are.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:39 pm#137, sorry, I have to strong>AGREE> with you on that. (damn, that’s a first) LMAO
November 24th, 2006 at 2:40 pmSuffice to say I would love to see a true criminal investigation into the events of that day.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire
The Cold Case Squad, unfortunately.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:42 pm#138, Agreed, there did not seem to be any criminal investigation. But at the same time, they had reason to strongly suspect it was terrorists because of the calls people made from onboard the planes. Is it 100% proof? No. Does it lead one down a road of reasonable certainty? I think so.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:43 pmunbelievable: “it’s really not the same scenario that you can compare.”
No, it’s not the same. It’s much worse than a fire on four or five floors. It’s the biggest man-made explosion in history. I admire skepticism, but, with all due respect, I sense a sort of dogma on your part.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:43 pmwayne and juan,
my posts are now being deleted, but, can either of you explain why you didn’t comment on this
but you jumped all over my response? just curious about that…maybe we can discuss it sometime when we are all here again. is this unbelievable person a ’special needs’ case that needs your help?
perhaps you should consider a bill maheresque new rule: don’t mess with me and i won’t mess with you??
oh, and wayne, i resent your comment about the willingness to debate. there is no one more willing to debate these silly trolls…please explain.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:44 pmsorry, I have to strong>AGREE> with you on that. (damn, that’s a first) LMAO
Comment by robert — November 24, 2006 @ 2:40 pm
Do you except we have NOTHING to agree upon ever?
I don’t.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:50 pmNo, it’s not the same. It’s much worse than a fire on four or five floors.
It’s not that simple. If it were, they wouldn’t require a degree, an internship and a licensing process to design buildings.
It’s the biggest man-made explosion in history.
But again – there is more than just that.
I admire skepticism, but, with all due respect, I sense a sort of dogma on your part.
Comment by Bluedog49 — November 24, 2006 @ 2:43 pm
I’m an Atheist. I don’t do dogma.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:52 pmMake that:
Do you expect we have NOTHING to agree upon ever?
November 24th, 2006 at 2:53 pmI just have to say that this is the most civil discussion I have seen here in a long time. No flame-thowing. No rants. No trolls. Nice. Thanks everyone. Gotta go for now.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:56 pm#150, we probably agree more than either of us think. (ok, now I’m pushing it…lol)
November 24th, 2006 at 2:58 pmI just have to say that this is the most civil discussion I have seen here in a long time. No flame-thowing. No rants. No trolls. Nice. Thanks everyone. Gotta go for now.
Comment by Bluedog49 — November 24, 2006 @ 2:56 pm
So you were skipping james’s posts also? : )
Yeah, I gotta get some stuff done too. Thanks for the civility in return.
Later guys…
November 24th, 2006 at 2:59 pmunbelievable: “I’m an Atheist. I don’t do dogma.”
I meant no offense. I like you. But, there are all kinds of dogma. Some forms of dogma are the result of being in a system of some sort for a long time. Professional organizations can suffer from dogma. Scientists can get caught up in certain kinds of dogma. I’m late. Gotta go.
November 24th, 2006 at 2:59 pmAgreed, there did not seem to be any criminal investigation. But at the same time, they had reason to strongly suspect it was terrorists because of the calls people made from onboard the planes. Is it 100% proof? No. Does it lead one down a road of reasonable certainty? I think so.
on the phone calls, please, if you haven’t already, give loose change 2 a look and a listen regarding them…you may be surprised. that being said, if we assume the nineteen guys on the planes did it, the need for investigation needs to go to motive. (a) who are the possible suspects; (b) who had the most to gain from the crime; and (c) who had the ability to complete the mission.
so assuming your intutition is true, it leaves the questions of co-conspirators unasked, and unanswered. and, i suggest it is simplistic to stop at the nineteen hijackers… and, i think that is what #138 BdN would say as well.
November 24th, 2006 at 3:13 pmAgreed, there did not seem to be any criminal investigation. —-robert
Whatever investigations they did are joke. Especially since 7 of the highjacker named in the 9/11 Commision report have been found to be alive and living in the middle east.
Also, with bodies, concrete, everything getting pulverized, even the “indestructable” black boxes were not found, supposedly totally destroyed. But Atta’s magic passport survived intact.
Lots of things do not add up, from that day and from the investigation.
November 24th, 2006 at 3:37 pmWayne, in the ME, certain names have special meaning and their naming is very different. For instance, look at the name Abu al Zarqawi(sic). That is only part af a much longer name that designates Place in family (Abu=father) al Zarqawi(sic)=from Zarqawi(sic). So, same/similar names are not uncomon un a family of villiage or organization.
November 24th, 2006 at 4:15 pm#156, but I agree that a lot does not add up
November 24th, 2006 at 4:18 pmThere’s a big problem with the cell phone calls: they’re not possible at the elevations and speeds flight 93 was supposed to be flying.
November 24th, 2006 at 4:35 pmBut at the same time, they had reason to strongly suspect it was terrorists because of the calls people made from onboard the planes. Is it 100% proof? No. Does it lead one down a road of reasonable certainty? I think so.
Comment by robert
Robert…as far as I know it is impossible to talk by cell phone from a plane…due to the cruise speed and the size of cell-phone antennas.
November 24th, 2006 at 4:36 pmWhy are you guys and gals referencing future posts?
November 24th, 2006 at 4:38 pmI don’t know if there was an official inquiry into the feasibility of the cell phone calls.
Here’s a link to an unofficial investigation:
http://www.physics911.net/cellphoneflight93.htm
(let’s see if this one gets past the spam filters)
November 24th, 2006 at 4:40 pmWalt,
I think 25-30 comments just disappeared. I haven’t gone back to try and figure which ones yets.
November 24th, 2006 at 4:42 pm#156, but I agree that a lot does not add up
Comment by robert
robert can see the future. :)
An advice, please, as posts are being deleted, copy the whole comment or an excerpt, so we can know who you guys are talking.
November 24th, 2006 at 4:45 pmI don’t know if there was an official inquiry into the feasibility of the cell phone calls.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire
I thought they used the Air Phones?
November 24th, 2006 at 4:47 pmIt looks like a lot of the 9/11 comments have dispapeared, as well as some of james risser’s comments, and possibly some of unbelievable’s comments, too.
November 24th, 2006 at 4:49 pmunbelievable & james,
Both made out of line comments.
Please stop.
It’s not nice.
It’s too personal.
You’re both good and passionate people.
Peace…
November 24th, 2006 at 5:04 pmi am sorry juan, i don’t see genitalia when i type nor when i argue and point out someone’s misuse of the english language and illegitimate debating techniques… i have/had no idea of her gender and it would not have mattered… maybe you would prefer if there were pink and blue text or something, but, whether it is hillary or joe lieberman, i would still tell them what i think of them.
November 24th, 2006 at 5:04 pmComment by no no not no
November 24th, 2006 at 5:14 pmIm getting deleted too. Fine, james nobody´s holding you. I was just saying.
An advice, please, as posts are being deleted, copy the whole comment or an excerpt, so we can know who you guys are talking.
—- Juan C
He was responding to my post about 9/11 inconsistancies, I think lol
hard to tell after the thread is out of whack.
November 24th, 2006 at 5:16 pmRoughly half of my comments don’t even make the thread. Some serious censorship goin’ on. Even on comments which abide by the “Terms of Use.”
bummer.
oh well, back to research and other projects.
November 24th, 2006 at 5:21 pmTP gets a little nervous when we, the dissidents, start questioning 9/11 commission report.
November 24th, 2006 at 5:26 pm…i don’t see genitalia when i type nor when i argue…
Comment by no no not no
It would be an interesting way to argue…..and type…
Heh.
November 24th, 2006 at 5:28 pm#141 – Juan C,
November 24th, 2006 at 5:32 pmIt is not the antenna size, it is due the switch-overs between cells. Since I am retired and have not stayed current in the engineering, I can not state the current limits, but at altitudes below 10,000 feet (about 3,100 meters), coverage is almost continuous. At 30,000 (about 9400 meters) feet, it is erratic as the cell radius is about 7 miles (about 11,000 meters) in rural areas. To envision the process, imagine that you are traveling between a series of hemispheres on the Earth’s surface. In urban areas, it gets worse because the cells are more concentrated and are compacted due to the increased traffic.
#153 – Zooey,
November 24th, 2006 at 5:38 pmIt’s a heck of a lot easier to type with a prick then a clitoris.
Walt, please don’t tell us that you know that from experience!
November 24th, 2006 at 5:52 pmIt’s a heck of a lot easier to type with a prick then a clitoris.
Comment by WaltTheMan
*Ok, diet pepsi up the nose…*
I don’t find it a problem at all, Walt, I just use my fingers…..to type.
November 24th, 2006 at 6:02 pm#156 – RUCerious,
November 24th, 2006 at 6:18 pmNo, I picked up Engineering in college.
It is not the antenna size, it is due the switch-overs between cells.
Comment by WaltTheMan
So its only the altitude? What I understand, which is not too much, is that cell companies place antennas to get more coverage. However, the big-size antennas you see in universities (like the one Penzias and Wilson used to detect the background radiation of the universe predicted by George Gamow), airports or military facilities give you a lot more coverage. Now, how can the pilot communicate but passengers with cell phones dont. Its another frecuency, wavelength, what? Whats the switch-over?
November 24th, 2006 at 6:23 pmOT, but important – Yea Aggies. Teasippers conquered 12 – 7!
November 24th, 2006 at 6:24 pmNo, I picked up Engineering in college.
Comment by WaltTheMan
What part of your body did you use to pick up Engineering? :)
November 24th, 2006 at 6:24 pmMy mind.
November 24th, 2006 at 6:37 pmMy mind.
November 24th, 2006 at 6:39 pmComment by WaltTheMan
Yeah, dumb, not funny question. I was caught up in the clitoris/prick moment.
Now, please, can you explain me whats a switch-ver and how is the transmission between tower and pilot?
#159 – Juan C,
November 24th, 2006 at 6:53 pmThe switchovers occur as one travels from on broadcast area to the next. Each broadcast area is called a cell. That is why we call them cell phones. Cell phones areas are restricted. When you place a call in area one, you will be automatically be switched to area two when you pass a specific boundary. The switchover takes about .4 seconds and is not noticeable at terrestrial altitudes and velocities as the system buffers about two seconds of conversation. .
Juan C,
November 24th, 2006 at 6:57 pmThat “on” in line 1 of post #164 should be “one”.
Juan, regarding the cells and switch-overs….if you were driving down the freeway at about 500 mph you would have a difficult time placing cell phone calls. By the time you made a connection with one cell you would have moved out of range. There would be a disconnect before you could be switched to the next cell in line.
Compounding the problem, calls made from a commercial aircraft had to be transmitted through the aluminum skin of the aircraft…not exactly conducive to making complete calls. See the link that managed to get posted above for a complete explanation.
November 24th, 2006 at 7:15 pmHere’s another link re: cellphones and flying:
http://physics911.net/projectachilles.htm
And, yes, Zooey, some calls were made with Aerophones. It’s the cell phone calls that are an unexplained impossibility.
November 24th, 2006 at 7:28 pmMy point in following this research to wherever it will lead: if it does turn out that the events of 9/11 were staged by a faction within our own government, then the underpinnings for the War on Terror are completely false.
It would mean that the Bush Administration is not incompetent, but rather the most highly competent and ruthless Administration in modern times. Given the money at stake, literally hundreds of billions of dollars, and the power at stake, dictatorial control of the most powerful country on the planet, it would behoove us to continue to question the events of that day until the “official explanation” answers and explains all the facts beyond a reasonable doubt.
Right now, if I were on a jury and the government presented its version as proof against Osama and the others, and the defense presented what I have seen in my research, I could not render a guilty verdict.
Yet such a verdict was rendered within hours of the attack and we went to war against two countries, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent children, women and men.
November 24th, 2006 at 7:39 pm#168 – BnF,
November 24th, 2006 at 8:53 pmThe verdict linking Iraq to 9/11 took about ten weeks to gel. The link to Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda was almost instantaneous as the Clinton administration had laid down the warnings during the transfer of power process. The unfortunate part was that Clinton did not eliminate this threat because he did not wish to hand over an unstable situation to the incoming administration. This is much the same as the courtesy offered to the incoming Kennedy administration in the Bay of Pigs situation by Eisenhower. In the earlier case, Kennedy proceeded with the plans that were set in place and a disaster occurred, in the later one – the intelligence was shelved and a disaster was created.
Conspiracy theories or not, as others have pointed out, there are way too many questions about the 9/11 attacks and the aftermath. Things just don’t add up. Yeah, if history would have unfolded differently…say, the planes had been shot down and the towers been saved, yet Bush still sat in the classroom for 7 minutes as the events unfolded, with a dumb look on his face…then yes, I think most of us could have simply brushed it off as another display of Bush’s incompetence.
But we didn’t get that, now did we?
We have…
- Bush sitting in the classroom for 7 minutes after being told the 2nd plane had hit.
Meaning he went into the school after the first plane hit. Why wasn’t he whisked off to a safe location when the 2nd plane hit?
Sorry, but “I didn’t want to scare the children” doesn’t do it for me.
As I also understand, Bush was in no hurry to leave once the infamous 7 minutes were over. He gave a speech before leaving the school grounds.
- At the school, Bush reportedly said he had seen video of the first plane hitting. If true, this is a lie. Video of the first plane hitting was not available at the time he claims to have seen it.
- No in-depth investigation on the steel from the towers. It was sold as scrap and shipped overseas in record time. Wouldn’t it have been prudent to find out why the steel failed (other than “oh, the fires from the jet fuel melted the steel”) so that events like this could be avoided in the future?
- As mentioned earlier, seismic activity was reportedly recorded on 9/11, but this was seconds before the towers started to fall, not as they fell. I’ve also seen a video on the Internet from a camera on a tripod that was set up near the towers. The video shakes several seconds prior to the collapse.
I’m not ready to say Bush was involved in the attacks, but anyone who says that the government would never attack its own people need to Google “Operation Northwoods.”
I do think that Bush and/or members of the administration and/or military knew something was coming, and decided to let it happen. With the corruption we’ve seen from members of Congress lately, put yourself in the shoes of a politician for a moment and consider the opportunities, some listed below.
Other tidbits:
- Evidence that Bush did virtually nothing to track terrorists between the time of taking office and 9/11.
- PNAC
- The billions in profit that could be made from war, even a limited one, and the corporate friends of Bush and Cheney that would get the no-bid contracts. (Think about it…ordinary citizens pay other ordinary citizens money to knock off a spouse or other family member. You think there are people who really care about a few thousand deaths when billions of dollars in money can be made?)
- A Republican controlled Congress that refused to provide any oversight or investigations into the companies making those billions in profit who are wasting the money and, among other things, providing unsafe water to our troops.
- A “war on terror” would surely last more than 4 years, virtually guaranteeing a re-election for Bush.
- And speaking of elections, the use of fear that war affords a candidate: Cheney advising America that we’d surely be attacked again should John Kerry be elected in 2004. And let’s not forget “the terrorists will win” if Dems win Congress in ‘06.
- The use of the terror alert system to put fear into Americans, many times over the objections of Sec. of DHS Tom Ridge.
- Two members of the Bush administration who say Bush was itching to invade Iraq within days after 9/11.
- Bush’s opposition to the formation of the 9/11 Commission.
- Bush’s insistence that he be interviewed by the commission only if Cheney was in attendance at the same time.
Sorry this is so long, but as I said there are too many questions and things to consider. We deserve answers.
November 25th, 2006 at 1:10 amBoth made out of line comments.
Please stop.
It’s not nice.
It’s too personal.
You’re both good and passionate people.
Comment by Zooey — November 24, 2006 @ 5:04 pm
No I didn’t.
I was having a conversation when he began insulting me. If you expect me to simply tolerate that, then you don’t know me at all. I call people on their bullying, and will continue to do so.
What I said to him was mild compared to what I, you and others have said to trolls. The double standard seems to get applied when it’s someone you like. And I know you like him… But would you have said this if it were Jason? Because his ad hominems were on par with Jason’s patronization.
Remember – I’ve never been banned. There’s a reason for that.
November 25th, 2006 at 9:24 am171 – WC.
Just a personal observation, regarding the 7 minute blank stare. It’s the same look one gets when one has memorized a lengthy script and is pulling it up from recall.
It could be the words “The Naton is under Attack” was a trigger phrase for Bush to begin running the script.
And I agree: We deserve answers.
November 25th, 2006 at 11:26 amunbelievable,
I have no wish to argue with either you or james. Like I said in my comment, you are both good and passionate people. I respect you both. My concern is when the responses become personal.
When you copied my comment, unbelievable, you left off the most important part:
Peace…
November 25th, 2006 at 12:13 pmPeace…
Comment by Zooey
You are an act of class. :)
November 25th, 2006 at 1:07 pm