Hmmm – along comes 911 right after these guys gain power.

Hmmmmm??????

Now scientists, architects and engineers claim that the towers were exploded using thermite cause only that would explain the towers coming down at free fall speeds encountering no resistance from the undamaged floors. Basic theories of heat transfer can not explain the massive 147 columns being weakened let alone melted?

Folks – Jet fuel fires (refined kerosene) will not weaken A36 structural steel let alone melt the stuff. A chemical reaction from thermite does explain all the molten metal.

Facts and physics are stubborn things.

According to the new New York Times/CBS News poll, only 16% of Americans think the government is telling the truth about 9/11 and the intelligence prior to the attacks:

“Do you think members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or are they mostly lying?

Telling the truth 16%

Hiding something 53%

Mostly lying 28%

Not sure 3%”

ah the ol “clinton said it too” defense

our resident scholar troll Kilotwatt deftly refusing to admit that talking about doing something incredibly stupid and actually DOING something incredibly stupid are two very different things. Mission Accomplished? Can’t some of this Iraqi oil money go toward paying PNAC’s ISP? oh wait, its all being used for reconstuction, just like the architechts of this war said it would..

its sorta like the guy who shoots his neighbor for looking at him funny trying to defend himself by claiming the guy down the blocked talked about wanting to do it as well…not gonna fly..

It’s amazing how these people think that they can re-write history, and their involvement (or complicity) in it, merely by making the web-pages go away. As though the Delete button would have been Ollie North’s ultimate solution and salvation, but I digress.
These guys are depending upon the notion that nobody else has a copy, but they are quite mistaken.

If anybody is interested in retrieving web pages from the past, you can try the Internet Archive’s Way Back Machine

It’s very easy to avoid accountability when you alone control the information which can condemn you. PNAC, and similarly arrogant fools, are truly arrogant enough to believe that they, in fact, are. I’ll enjoy watching this mistake be their ultimate undoing.

Links are disfunctional now. How about the letter itself, instead:

January 26, 1998
The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States
Washington, DC
Dear Mr. President:
We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor.

The policy of “containment” of Saddam Hussein has been steadily eroding over the past several months. As recent events have demonstrated, we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections. Our ability to ensure that Saddam Hussein is not producing weapons of mass destruction, therefore, has substantially diminished. Even if full inspections were eventually to resume, which now seems highly unlikely, experience has shown that it is difficult if not impossible to monitor Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons production. The lengthy period during which the inspectors will have been unable to enter many Iraqi facilities has made it even less likely that they will be able to uncover all of Saddam’s secrets. As a result, in the not-too-distant future we will be unable to determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess such weapons.

Such uncertainty will, by itself, have a seriously destabilizing effect on the entire Middle East. It hardly needs to be added that if Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction, as he is almost certain to do if we continue along the present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant portion of the world’s supply of oil will all be put at hazard. As you have rightly declared, Mr. President, the security of the world in the first part of the 21st century will be determined largely by how we handle this threat.

Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends for its success upon the steadfastness of our coalition partners and upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate. The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.

We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration’s attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam’s regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political and military efforts. Although we are fully aware of the dangers and difficulties in implementing this policy, we believe the dangers of failing to do so are far greater. We believe the U.S. has the authority under existing UN resolutions to take the necessary steps, including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf. In any case, American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council.

We urge you to act decisively. If you act now to end the threat of weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. or its allies, you will be acting in the most fundamental national security interests of the country. If we accept a course of weakness and drift, we put our interests and our future at risk.

Sincerely,

Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitage William J. Bennett
Jeffrey Bergner John Bolton Paula Dobriansky
Francis Fukuyama Robert Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad
William Kristol Richard Perle Peter W. Rodman
Donald Rumsfeld William Schneider, Jr. Vin Weber
Paul Wolfowitz R. James Woolsey Robert B. Zoellick

Does anyone have a link to the 1998 letter from PNAC to Clinton demanding action against Iraq? Sometines used here to introduce Bushco believers to reality.

Thanks

The members aren’t going anywhere. They’re just wanting people to forget about them for a few years.

Iraq and Iran…control the largest resources outside of their buds in SA, and screw the world.

And, being the ultra American patriot, I gleefully await their abject failure. This is not our America.

Fu(k all the neocons.