What a coincidence: Your statement that I was taken in by a Nigerian scammer is a lie. I suggest you retract it or offer proof.
9/11 Pentagon video released, shows explosion and no plane
by What-A-Coincidence 75 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Jourles
The fact that Northwoods existed doesn't constitute evidence that 9/11 was a conspiracy
Of course it doesn't constitute evidence that 9/11 was a conspiracy. The question is, if prior US administrations could draft such heinous operations against *innocent* civilians, what would stop another administration from doing the same thing on a larger scale? We cannot firmly say one way or the other that the Bush administration did or did not contribute or allow 9/11 to occur. And taking a firm stand on either side of this coin is foolish. It could be decades from now that information might leak out about the truth surrounding 9/11. I wouldn't go so far as to say that we have the answers to every single question out there.
-
under_believer
Jourles, don't buy into it. It's a false correlation. Yes, Northwoods existed. But it was never implemented, because it was a terrible idea and wouldn't have worked.
Your question was "what would stop another administration from doing the same?" I assume you mean "planning a Northwoods-like operation to create a casus belli against Iraq." The answer is, nothing would stop them from planning one. But reality would very likely prevent them from implementing it.
Northwoods does not constitute proof that 9/11 was a conspiracy. -
What-A-Coincidence
JeffT: It wasn't me, it's a conspiracy! Plus your avatar looks like a dust particle.
-
JeffT
What a coincidence: my apologies, I was scrolling through the exhange quickly.
Badwillie: my comment should have been directed to you. Would you care to elaborate?
-
What-A-Coincidence
JeffT: It's all good. In the end, we are gonna all need one big group hug :-)
-
restrangled
Jourles asked:
Why didn't they immediately put into place the strict measures that we have to endure today when we fly??
Same reason they didn't see those suffering during Katrina for more than several days, ......a very inept administration. The big 4 (Bush, Cheney, Rummey, and Chertoff).....still believing they had a mandate, drunk with power.
No need to expend themselves needlessly.
r
-
Jourles
The answer is, nothing would stop them from planning one. But reality would very likely prevent them from implementing it.
Exactly. Had Kennedy approved it, Cuba would likely be a US territory today - like a Puerto Rico. But when you compare the Kennedy administration to the Bush one, what major differences do you come away with? I see a "my way or the highway" mentality. You have a VP who equates the pulling of troops out of a neverending war as "supporting the terrorists" and being "anti-American." I'm just waiting for the pres or vp to flat out say, "We run this country, not you. Stay out of our business American people."
it was a terrible idea and wouldn't have worked.
Is this simply your opinion or is it from someone that had input to Northwoods? From what I read, they had it planned down to a tee. It was only Kennedy who quashed it. Kennedy's entire JCoS signed off on it. Obviously they thought it would be a good idea...
Again, Northwoods doesn't prove anything about 9/11 - I have no problem with that. But in light of this document becoming public, it shows that a precedence existed dating back to the 1960's, at least. Who knows what else has happened in the world since then which was fabricated by governments.
-
under_believer
Jourles said:
> Why didn't they immediately put into place the strict measures that we have to endure today when we fly?
The TSA and the associated policies and practices that exist are an enormous Rube Goldberg device, which cost billions of dollars and has thousands of employees. They couldn't immediately put that into place even if they were a competent administration, which they're not. -
under_believer
> Again, Northwoods doesn't prove anything about 9/11 - I have
> no problem with that. But in light of this document becoming
> public, it shows that a precedence existed dating back to the
> 1960's, at least.
I'm not sure what your point is in bringing up Northwoods in reference to 9/11, then. If you're arguing that it lends more credence to the idea that 9/11 could have been a conspiracy, well, that's logically equivalent to saying "because people have the ability to conspire, conspiracies must exist." I won't disagree with that proposition, but it's a leap from there to "because people have the ability to conspire, 9/11 must have been a conspiracy," which is, I think, what our defeated and erstwhile friend was arguing.