State of the Union Address

[starvingeyes]

venom - they didn't know what was going on? assuming that these planes were hijacked [ which i currently feel is 90% likely. i have very little reason to believe joe vialls' assertion that home run was used to crash the planes. however, such a system likely does exist. why was it not deployed to save the planes? ] the black box recorder and pilot to tower communications, not to mention the rapid, simultaneous route changing of 4 unrelated planes would clue off governmental authorities. these people aren't stupid, you know.

check your timelines. cheney was already stowed away whilst bush continued to read on. they new. they obviously felt protecting the vice president was a high priority, so why not the president himself?

and that 50 minutes i'm talking about is AFTER the first plane hit.

corey - finding articles by a bunch of conservative pundits or mainstream media reporting on terrorism is not exactly a challenge.

as for the shoebomber.. i'll let vialls do my talking:

http://www.geocities.com/mknemesis/grenade.html

enjoy.

[starvingeyes]

corey my facts support CIA assets [ that would be the us ] committing the attacks with the complicity of the us. although i will admit i lack mainstream evidence to support my assertion that obl is a cia asset, i have tons of it showing government complicity in the 9/11 attacks.

[Bandalero]

wasn't it 6 matches?

[Corey]

chris... honestly... you mock my references and then provide me with a personal site hosted at geocities? Give me a break. I'm supposed to believe this jackass?

The man pleaded guilty for crying out loud.

http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/2 ... -6072r.htm

He was repeatedly asked to put out the match and refused to do so. Try doing that anywhere, it won't be taken lightly. Passengers saw powder fall from his shoe!

A bored passenger would be a little more cooperative.

I am dumber for have reading that passage. And its sad to think that you find it credible.

Now find me an article that tells me that the LA airport shooting was a figment of the dead people's imagination.

[starvingeyes]

"a geocities page, o no!"

have you ever heard of the shooting of a british police woman that occured outside of the libyan embassy in london in 1984? no? well the americans/british/powerful folk claimed the shot came from inside the embassy. JOE VIALLS, the guy i just linked you to, proved conclusively that the shots were fired from an american owned building next to the embassy.

he will be called as a key witness in the port arthure massaccre trial, and likely the trial of the bali bomber as well. that being said,

he pleaded guilty? wow! so did the guy they bagged for the bombing in bali, even though that was clearly done with a micro nuke. or what about the guy they got for the port arthur shootings in 96?

this guy entered a cafe, and, in a moving piroutte killed 20 people and injured 11 more, using 30 bullets. of the 20 he killed, 19 were killed with direct shots to the head, and one was killed using angles to create a bone shrapnel effect with the victims head. the shooter fired all the shots from his right hip, and used only 30 bullets so he'd have on in the chamber to protect himself during the reload.

the guy they bagged was a retarded, left handed kid. yeah, right.

as for reid:

" At a hearing in US federal court, FBI agent Margaret Cronin said Richard Reid was in possession of a "functioning, improvised device," which "if placed beside an outer wall could have or would have created a large hole in the fuselage of the plane." The federal court heard from the FBI that the improvised device contained an explosive called TATP.

It seems that one part of the FBI has no idea what any other part of the FBI is doing or saying. The highly stable C-4 & Cordex bomb configuration of yesterday, has suddenly changed [or more likely been switched] to highly unstable TATP today. The full name for TATP is triacetone triperoxide, a dangerous improvised high explosive known to have been manufactured by "terrorist" organizations. "

explain that, if you please. the FBI changed the bomb the guy had. why?

[faninor]

There was a lot of panic around the US in the minutes after the planes hit the World Trade Center and Pentagon. At one point, I heard reports that there were at least 3 more planes that had been hijacked than there actually were. By not taking the President to a safe location immediately, the government was giving the message that, although something terrible was happening, they still felt fairly secure. You think this means they knew he was out of danger, because the government was involved. I think they probably considered that if suddenly both the president and the vice president were taken to secure locations, they would be showing more fear and there would be more panic.

And yes, Geocities pages aren't good sources for information.

[mosaik]

fear and panic? the man's plane can withstand a nuclear attack. the president can't go to sleep without an armed escort. men with guns and licenses to kill are with him no matter where he is, 24/7. All this is neccessary because of his high profile job and his status as a symbol to the amerikan public.

what do you think would have a more lasting effect on the public; showing a bit more concern and relocating the president or letting terrorists kill him?

face it. he knew and he did nothing. why are you so afraid to question his motive?

unplug yourself.

[starvingeyes]

i don't see how something as irrelevant as a webhost can discredit a private investigator with the proven career track record of skills and success as joe vialls.

[Bandalero]

if he's got a good track record, then he'd be on a major broadcast affiliate. he'd be doing shows like brokaw, and rather, and that other guy on ABC that nobody watches.

[starvingeyes]

no, he wouldn't, because his area of expertise is something rather hostile to both the public and the government. furthermore, he's english.

did nobody bother to read the part where i mentioned that he has already proven one government lie, and is being called as a key witness in trials pertaining to major international incidents?

[Corey]

This just in: "Things change with time."

read all about it here:

http://www.geocities.com/horseandponylu ... rsies.html

[faninor]

I believe a more appropriate response about Joe Vialls would be this: http://nerdcities.com/guardian/SeptemberEleventh/Bijlmer/

The man's a private investigator who specializes in government/media conspiracies. He begins by taking a situation and saying, "Okay, how can I make this look like a conspiracy?" Then he goes through the facts, ignores or attempts to discredit anything that would suggest it isn't a conspiracy, probably occasionally creates some evidence to support his argument. When he finds a situation where he can make a half-believable case, he puts it onto one of his numerous websites. Sometimes he might actually come across a case that is in fact a conspiracy, but I think for the mere reason that this guy's job is to make things look like conspiracies, he shouldn't be considered a reliable source for factual information to base your arguments off of.

[Corey]

No joke, this guy is a fraud:

http://www.shootersnews.addr.com/snpajoevialls.html
http://ellisctaylor.homestead.com/holly ... livan.html
http://www.thetigersclaws.co.za/vialls/JVPtgnEA.html

[starvingeyes]

2 of those articles are in reference to an issue on which he later changed his mind. the one about port arthur is by ANOTHER conspiracy theory group who doesn't like Joe's suggestion that it was a middle eastern gunman [ joe thinks it was israel ] or the fact that joe believe's the police should be investingating this. [ your site doesn't think the police can be trusted ] they do not disagree that there was no way the attack was actually perpetrated by the guy that was arrested for it.

the other one is an analysis of a case by him that i haven't read yet.

none of those 4 disputed his assertions about libya, which still stand.

vialls does say stuff with which i don't agree. but he is a good PI.

[starvingeyes]

o yeah, and corey, one of the guys you tried to use to discredit vialls cannot even spell properly. come on.

credibility issues with vialls aside, can anyone explain to me how it's possible for reid to have had "C4 and a fuse" [ a bomb, that, without a detonator cap, which reid was not reported as having, had about a 1% chance of exploding ] when he was first arrested and TATP later on?

[Corey]

show me a reference where the fbi was quoted for saying that the substance involved was C4? Because if your only source is Joe Vialls, we've already proved he's lied in the past, so there's no reason to believe him in this case as well.

[mosaik]

Corey, what did you hear about the bomb when Reid was first brought down?

edit:

Look, I really don't care if you ever decide to believe us, but i do have one question for you: why are you so quick to automatically believe that your justice system ALWAYS gets the right man?

http://www.wm3.org

I always start with the high profile examples.

QUESTION EVERYTHING, Corey. What good does it do you to blindly follow GWB? Right wing hard liners like you have made several arguments that compare the anti-war groups to the apeasers of WWII. I'm saying that anybody who follows GWB in a blind haze of nationalism is no different from the nazis.

I don't think this war is about oil. i think it's about arabs.

[Corey]

Look, I really don't care if you ever decide to believe us, but i do have one question for you: why are you so quick to automatically believe that your justice system ALWAYS gets the right man?

I could ask you the same thing. Why are you so quick to automatically believe the justice system ALWAYS gets the wrong man?

QUESTION EVERYTHING, Corey. What good does it do you to blindly follow GWB?

Right..... just like how you question everything that contradicts GWB right? I'm certain you don't blindly follow his opposers.

Right wing hard liners like you have made several arguments that compare the anti-war groups to the apeasers of WWII. I'm saying that anybody who follows GWB in a blind haze of nationalism is no different from the nazis.

So now I'm a nazi because I don't get off on conspiracy theories with little credibility, pointing out some evidence while hiding or omitting others, and contrive blatant lies like you? There's also people out there that believe in aliens or psychics or people who can talk to dead and I think they are all full of crap too. But apparently that makes me a nazi. I'm the one that needs to think for myself when you are the one who will intentionally only look for articles that portray the US in negative light while ignoring everything else? Please. How are you any different than me? Metaphorically, the US military would be your Jews and Joe Vialls your Hitler. Assume the US is guilty until proven innocent. Very nice.

[starvingeyes]

http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/12/22/plane. ... index.html - article in which the FBI states the bomb Reid had was a C4 explosive.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/200 ... harges.htm - article in which the FBI states the bomb reid has was TATP.

cnn and usa today. is that credible enough for you?

[Bandalero]

from site one.

BOSTON, Massachusetts (CNN) -- A commercial flight from Paris, France, to Miami, Florida, made an emergency landing in Boston on Saturday after a passenger attempted to light what may have been some sort of explosive in his shoes, authorities said.

"It appears that the shoes did contain det [detonation] cord and some improvised explosives, C-4 in nature," Kinton said. "If this indeed is an improvised explosive, there is certainly enough there to do damage to an aircraft in flight."

Federal authorities had not confirmed the presence of explosives Saturday evening

this just proves to me that the investigation was fresh and that they had no idea what kind of bomb it was.

the other site is after the court hearing, they have had a year to test what kind of explosive it was.

not impressive. i bet if you look through some archives, you will find an article saying something like at first the bomb was thought to be c4 based but later proved wrong.